Materialist Arguement Against Hierarchy

[Comrade Jandar]

I was wondering if anyone, namely anarchists, could provide a materialist argument against hierarchy? Have any theorists ever dealt with this? Thanks.

[MarxSchmarx]

I was wondering if anyone, namely anarchists, could provide a materialist argument against hierarchy? Have any theorists ever dealt with this? Thanks.

What about showing that hierarchical social behavior is not part of our genetic makeup?

[Red Economist]

At a guess, "Hierachy" (basically the division of society in to classes) is a consequence of the division of labour. the division between mental and physical labour means that the rulers (mental labour) must exploit those engaged in physical labour inorder to survive and consequently impose a state to ensure their class rule.

this isen't really a criticism, rather a materialist explanation for hierarchy. As far as I know no-one has made a specifically materialist analyisis of 'Hierarchial' society, but the attack on class society has some implicit criticisms of the consequences of hierarchy: the state, the class struggle, The division of labour and specialisation leading to stunting of the development of individuals, etc.

that said, you might want to look into Marxist analyisis of primitive communism (stateless and classless definition of pre-agricultural and hunter gatherer societies with no hiearchy) as a guide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_the_Family,_Private_Property_and_the _State

[Ravachol]

Michel Foucault makes a great (though spiced with post-modernist jargon) materialist analysis of power relations and their 'archeology' (ie. historical origins and processes of becoming). 'Discipline and Punish' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discipline_and_Punish) is a good start.

[l'Enfermé]

First, a study of the origins of class-society and the disintegration of primitive societies is required. Engels' Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State (http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1884/origin-family/index.htm) is very much appropriate for the task.

What do you man by "materialism"? Philosophically, in the non-Marxist usage, it has nothing to do with hierarchies, economics or politics. It's the theory that everything that exists is either matter or energy.

Besides that use, there's the Marxist theory of historical materialism and also dialectical materialism(as opposed to Hegel's idealist materialism). Historical materialism is a method of examining history. It holds that the immediate driving force of all hitherto existing society is class struggle, economic development and changes in the means of productions, and that everything else springs from this.

Historical materialism, then, is not a dogma or idealogy, it's a method of analysis. The conclusion of this analysis is that the State is bound to wither away(After a Proletarian revolution, when it loses it's political character and simply becomes a tool for the administration of things like trains and such) and leave a state-less, classless society.

[Rafiq]

The fact that it's artificial though essential for the bourgeois class.

[Thirsty Crow]

The fact that it's artificial though essential for the bourgeois class.
Basically this.

What anarchists call hierarchy is both an indispensible outcome of the capitalist relations of production (the division of labour, for instance, although it preceeds capitalism in its historical origins) and an indispensible means for the ruling class to preserve its position.