Mode of Production (Forces and Relation of Production)

(Relevant for Sociology Paper-I)

• The pivotal role of production in shaping human history served as a guiding principle in Marx’s writings. The fundamental needs of survival, such as food, clothing, and shelter, cannot be obtained directly from nature; they require the production of material goods derived from natural resources. For Karl Marx, the history of human societies revolves around how individuals interact with one another in their quest to sustain their livelihoods. He asserts, “The first historical act is… the production of material life.” This act, indeed, holds historical significance as it forms the fundamental foundation for all historical developments.
• According to Marx, economic production, or the creation of material wealth, serves as the starting point from which the entire social structure of a society takes shape. He emphasizes the reciprocal relationship between economic factors and other dimensions of human development throughout history. While economic production plays a central role in explaining societal transformations, Marx highlights that the forces of production, in conjunction with the relationships of production, constitute the underlying basis for the economic and social history of every society.

Forces Of Production:

• The forces of production encompass the various methods and elements involved in the production of material goods. They encompass technological knowledge, equipment, tools, machinery, labor, and the level of technology employed. In essence, the forces of production include the means of production and labor power. The development of machinery, changes in the labor process, the utilization of new energy sources, and the education of workers are all part of these forces. Science and related skills can also be seen as integral components of the productive forces.
• The advancement of the forces of production reflects humanity’s ongoing struggle to harness nature through labor. Within each social order, there is a continuous transformation in the material forces of production. Sometimes, these changes arise from natural and ecological phenomena, such as the depletion of rivers, deforestation, or soil exhaustion, as observed in tribal societies. However, more commonly, changes in the instruments of production drive these transformations. Throughout history, humans have consistently sought to improve their lives and overcome scarcity.
• The driving force behind this pursuit is the innate and rational impulse of individuals to enhance their circumstances and overcome scarcity by developing the productive forces. Above all, humans are creatures that produce within society, exerting their labor upon nature. The productive forces necessitate the creation and dismantling of successive systems of production relations among people. As humans’ knowledge and mastery over nature increase, the productive forces inherently exhibit a tendency to expand.
• Different socio-economic structures of production, which have characterized human history, emerge or decline based on their ability to facilitate or hinder the expansion of society’s productive capacity. The growth of the productive forces thus accounts for the overall trajectory of human history. However, it is important to note that the productive forces encompass not only the means of production (such as tools, machines, and factories) but also labor power—the skills, knowledge, experience, and other human faculties applied in the process of work. The productive forces represent the collective powers that society possesses for material production.
• According to Marx, labor power refers to the capacity to perform useful work that enhances the value of products. Workers sell their labor, which is their ability to work and contribute value to commodities. They exchange their labor power with capitalists in return for wages paid in cash.
• Labor, in practice, involves the actual exercise of one’s ability to add value to commodities. Marx utilizes the concept of labor power to explain the source of surplus value. For instance, if a capitalist invests money to purchase goods and later sells them for a higher amount, this is only possible because some value has been added to those goods. Labor power, according to Marx, precisely refers to the capacity that adds value to a commodity. Through the acquisition and utilization of labor power, capitalists can extract labor, which serves as the source of value.
• The origin of surplus value in the capitalist system of production lies in the process wherein the value paid by capitalists for labor power is lower than the value that labor power adds to a commodity.

Relation of Production:

• According to Marx, the act of production involves people entering into specific relationships with one another. Production occurs solely within these social relationships. These relationships of production are the social connections among individuals involved in the production process. The nature and level of development of the productive forces determine these social relationships.
• The forces and relations of production are deeply intertwined. The advancement of one leads to an increasing incompatibility or contradiction with the other. In fact, these contradictions between the two aspects of production serve as the driving force behind historical progress. The causal chain in historical development can be summarized as follows: the forces of production shape the superstructure. However, there is considerable debate regarding the primacy of either the relations of production or the forces of production as the primary catalyst for social change.
• These relations can be broadly categorized into two types. The first type pertains to the technical relationships necessary for the actual process of production. The second type encompasses the relations of economic control, which are legally manifested as ownership of property. These relations govern access to the productive forces and the products of production.
• Relations of production are essentially social relations. They extend beyond mere ownership of the means of production. The relationship between the employer and the worker, for example, involves domination, while the relationship among co-workers entails cooperation. Relations of production exist between people, whereas the means of production involve relationships between people and objects. The relations of production have the power to influence the momentum and direction of productive force development.
• Relations of production are reflected in the economic ownership of the productive forces. For instance, under capitalism, the most fundamental of these relations is the bourgeoisie’s ownership of the means of production, while the proletariat only possesses its labor power. The relationship of production can also exert dominance and bring about changes in the forces themselves. For example, capitalist relations of production often lead to revolutionary transformations in the instruments of production and the labor process.

Mode of Production:

• Mode of Production refers to the overarching economic system that dictates how people produce and distribute the resources necessary for sustaining life. It encompasses the forces of production and the relations of production, which together define specific modes such as capitalism or feudalism. According to Marx, the mode of production is the primary determinant of social phenomena. Different modes of production can be distinguished by the varying interplay between the forces and relations of production. For instance, in a feudal mode of production, the lord does not exercise direct control over the peasant’s means of production or the distribution of the product.
• In Marx’s writings, historical periods are characterized and differentiated based on the modes of material production. In essence, history is built upon successive modes of material production. The forces of production, representing the extent of human control over nature, and the relations of production, referring to the social relationships within the process of production, are two integral aspects of the mode of production. The forces of production shape the relations of production, and together they define the mode of production. The successive modes of production serve as fundamental elements in providing a systematic account of history.
• A crucial element in defining the mode of production is the way in which surplus is generated and controlled. Surplus refers to the amount that exceeds what is required for immediate consumption and takes the form of profit. This surplus is produced through the exploitation of the working class, selling their labor for wages that are less than the value they create. The production of surplus is crucial as it enables societies to grow and change, making it the primary factor in defining the mode of production.
• Each mode of production has its specific relations of production, which are not accidental but deliberately structured to facilitate the extraction of surplus from the working people by the property-owning class. For example, under feudalism, the relations of production are designed to ensure the feudal lord’s dominance over the serf, enabling the appropriation of surplus. If such relations were to persist under capitalism, they would fail to serve their purpose. Hence, new production relations develop under capitalism to allow capitalists to appropriate surplus value from the workers.
• Neither the forces of production nor the relations of production are fixed or static. Even within a given mode of production, the forces of production can undergo changes. Technological advancements, for instance, can lead to increased productivity in a society over time. Capitalist nations today are vastly different from a century ago when capitalism emerged. These changes in the productive forces have resulted in corresponding transformations in the relations of production. While modern workers may not face the same level of exploitation as their factory worker predecessors, Marxists argue that exploitation still persists. This is because modern workers, with the aid of advanced technology, generate more surplus value than before, yet their earnings do not proportionally reflect this increase.

The four modes of production, identified by Marx during his studies of human societies

• PRIMITIVE-COMMUNAL: The primitive-communal system represents the earliest and most basic form of human organization, spanning thousands of years. During this period, humans relied on primitive tools, learned to create fire, engage in agriculture, and raise animals. The forces of production were at a rudimentary stage, and the relations of production were based on the collective ownership of resources. Consequently, these relations were founded on mutual assistance and cooperation, as people recognized that their primitive tools alone were insufficient to withstand the powerful forces of nature. It was through collective effort that they could survive and thrive.
• ANCIENT MODE OF PRODUCTION: The ancient mode of production predates the feudal system and is characterized by slavery as the fundamental basis of the productive system. The relationship between masters and slaves is considered the essence of slavery. In this system, the master possessed ownership rights over the slave and appropriated the products of the slave’s labor. The slave was denied the ability to reproduce and was completely dependent on the master for sustenance.
• In agricultural slavery, exploitation operated through specific mechanisms. The slave worked on the master’s land and received subsistence in return. The master’s profit derived from the difference between what the slave produced and what the slave consumed. The slave had no means of reproducing themselves, and the reproduction of slavery relied on acquiring new slaves through means unrelated to the demographic capacities of the enslaving population. The rate of accumulation depended on the number of slaves acquired rather than their productivity.
• Feudal lords, just like capitalists in later systems, exploited their tenants or serfs. Capitalists extracted surplus value, while feudal lords appropriated rent from the serfs. Serfs, who lacked legal freedom, were devoid of property rights, although they could use the lord’s property. They were compelled to surrender their labor and the surplus produced beyond what was necessary for family subsistence and the basic reproduction of the peasant household economy. The economic demands of the feudal lords required the serfs to fulfill various obligations, either through performing services or paying dues in money or kind. These dues or taxes were levied on the peasants’ family holdings, and feudal rent, whether in the form of services or taxes, constituted a significant component of the feudal mode of production. The feudal lords could enforce their authority through military strength, supported by the force of law. Serfdom in this mode of production involved a direct relationship between rulers and servants, and the means of production were simple and inexpensive.
• The evolution of the feudal system led to the emergence of regional markets for the exchange of agricultural and manufactured goods. The specific needs of the ruling class and influential Church officials stimulated the growth of commodity production, including luxury goods such as silk, spices, fruits, and wines. This activity gave rise to international trade routes and commercial centers. It laid the groundwork for capitalist relations of production, which eventually became the main contradiction within the feudal system, leading to its eventual decline. During this transformation, many peasants were dispossessed of their lands and forced into wage labor.
• CAPITALIST MODE OF PRODUCTION: Capitalism refers to a mode of production where capital is the dominant means of production. Capital can manifest in various forms, such as money or credit used for acquiring labor power and production materials. In the capitalist mode of production, private ownership of capital in its various forms is concentrated in the hands of the capitalist class or bourgeoisie, excluding the majority of the population.
• Marx distinguished between industrial capitalists and merchant capitalists. Merchant capitalists engaged in buying goods in one market and selling them in another, taking advantage of price disparities. Industrial capitalists, according to Marx, capitalized on the difference between the labor market and the market for the commodities produced. He observed that successful industries generally had lower input costs than output prices, referring to the surplus value derived from surplus labor

Asiatic Mode of Production

• The Asiatic mode of production characterizes primitive communities in which land ownership is communal. These communities still retain elements of kinship-based organization. State power, representing the real or imagined unity of these communities, controls the utilization of crucial economic resources and directly appropriates a portion of the community’s labor and production.
• This mode of production represents one of the potential paths of transition from classless to class-based societies, and it may be the oldest form of this transition. It embodies the contradiction inherent in this transition, as it combines communal relations of production with emerging forms of exploitation and the establishment of the State.
• Marx did not provide a comprehensive exposition of the history of India. Instead, he made observations on specific contemporary issues in India that garnered public attention, or he drew upon India’s past and present conditions to illustrate certain aspects of his broader arguments. Therefore, the concept of the Asiatic Mode of Production is insufficient for a comprehensive understanding of Indian history and society.

Criticism

• The mode of production is a conceptual framework that analyzes the economic organization of a society. It acknowledges that within a specific society and time period, multiple modes of production can coexist. However, it is crucial to identify a dominant or determining mode of production that holds greater significance and influence over all other systems of production.
• Especially during times of social revolution, it is common for multiple modes of production to exist simultaneously within the same society.