Primitive-communal system: whether representations are right?
Concept socially - an economic formation were developed by Marxism and is its one of cornerstones.
The Marxism claims that socially - the economic formation completely characterizes this or that historical type of society which is based on a certain way of production and the speaker as a step of progressive development of world history of mankind from a primitive-communal system, through a slaveholding system, feudalism and capitalism to a communistic formation. The conclusion which is drawn by Marxists as it seems to them, logically following from the theory, is that, in - the first, the defining factor of existence of each formation is exclusively economic factor, in - the second, change of formations results from a social revolution.
It should be noted that in Marxism along with existence of false situations about which it was told in article “The formational theory of Marx: as far as it is comprehensive?“, the important place is taken by unsuccessfully chosen terms. The term “primitive-communal system“ concerns to one of unsuccessfully chosen. This term appeared in the assumption that the first human society had to be to identically nowadays existing tribes. Similar identification is how competent?
Here that is written by Lev Gumilev concerning an identification of nowadays existing tribe with the first human society.
“On Small Angdamang, in wonderful climate, among the magnificent nature there lives the small negroid tribe of an ongkha. Nobody never offended them. There it is arranged the reserve and even tourists are not let. Inhabitants are peace, friendly, honest, very clean. They are fed with collecting and fishing. Diseases there a rarity and if that happens - the management of the reserve gives help. It would seem, paradise, and the population is reduced. They simply are lazy to live. Sometimes prefer to hunger, than to look for food; women do not want to give birth; children are taught only one - to float. Adults want from the civilized world only one - tobacco. At all this ongkh are very sensitive to justice and do not transfer offense. Their women are chaste and when the visiting Burman tried to flirt behind them, ongkh killed him, and then reported about it to the administration, but not as about the fault, and as about establishing order; certainly, about their punishment there was no speech also. And it is correct! There is nothing to climb in someone else`s ethnos.
But here that strange. The director of office of department of anthropology, the educated Hindu Chowdhury told the author of a sketch: “… ongkh live as the mankind lived 20 thousand years ago. For them nothing changed. They eat what the nature gives, and the sun and a fire give them heat“.
Here force of hypnosis of noncritical apprehended evolutionary theory of ethnogenesis. And how, according to the Indian scientist, ancestors of an ongkha got to the Andaman Islands? They had to know not only coasting navigation; and hardly they floated on the Indian, very rough ocean at random. Onions and arrows should be invented or borrowed from neighbors too. The marriage customs forbidding even in case of early widowhood repeated marriage and limiting marriages with close relatives - at all not a primitive. Language of an ongkha is unknown because the Indian ethnographers did not learn it yet. But when it happens, for certain it will turn out that the ongkha has memories of ancestors, myths and fairy tales, yet not absolutely forgotten. But the vitality of an ongkha is lowered. The fourth part of young women are infertile. If also the situation was 20 thousand years ago, then ancestors of an ongkha would die out long ago.
No, ongkh and similar to them ethnoses - not children, but old men. Without passionarity people are less adapted for life on Earth, than animals. Those in stable and favorable conditions do not die out“.
on the example of the tribe of an ongkha we see that delusions as a result of “noncritical apprehended evolutionary theory of ethnogenesis“ can be very resistant. And still existence is primitive - a communal system connect with these and only with these tribes. It is considered that the primitive-communal system in the social plan cannot be developed, i.e. it by all means has to consist of the only leader and the only shaman. Why? Yes only because all nowadays existing tribes have such structure of operating tribe device. But all nowadays existing tribes are old men as Gumilev quite reasonably claims.
It is well-known that the closer the person approaches an old age, the communications connecting him with society are torn more: the production activity stops, and together with it and communications with colleagues; children mature and they have resistant own interests which are not crossed with the aging relative in any way; friends leave and which - who in a grave. Less communications, there is more and more loneliness.
The same happens also to ethnos: the old age is closer, i.e. the potential of passional tension in ethnos is less, the more communications are torn both in ethnos, and beyond its limits. In process of approach of ethnos by an old age, the suite of the emperor more and more thaws, and at last there comes the moment when the emperor remains all alone, having turned from the terrible emperor of one of superstates into the leader of the tribe. The same process, in process of aging of ethnos, happens also to the Supreme priest who turns into the shaman. However when there was the first human society, the ethnos was young, was crowded with a passionarity and promptly extended, so promptly expanding a circle of communications both in ethnos, and beyond its limits. Both the leader, and the shaman promptly acquired suites, turning into the emperor and the Supreme priest.
Branching of social institutes can testify only to ethnos youth, but cannot serve in any way as any characteristic of in what public formation there is this ethnos.