-We cant assume that all societies were all alike…we must look at their history
-It is important to look to understand diversity
-He will make it look like there were two different types of society.
-to dispel the idea that European societies were superior and thus they were able to
-In some cases they conquered superior societies, maybe because of their fucked
up political systems
Some colonies had Advanced economic and social systems…
Had developed independently and had vast trade systems
Colonialism is related to capitalism and its rise…character was defined by it.
Cap destroyed social-economic organization
Reshaped societies to its own needs
When we think of colonialism…it was certainly not a one way process in which a
powerful society takes over a less powerful one…it was a two sided equation
On one hand you have the colonizer
-Nature of societies that colonized (processes of development, political system)
will define how they colonize
-determines their needs, goals, needs etc and even their means of
-Society that expands in early 1500s were defined by their elites…wanted
luxury goods such as gold and silver. When it expands in industrialist times, they look for
more…such as raw materials to feed their growing industry Nature of societies will also determine what kind of resources they will have...etc etc etc.
Their militaries, everything is determined by it.
Conquest of different parts of the world was not the same all over.
When you look at the diversity of colonial experiences…it is defined by:
Nature of the colonizer
Nature of the colonized
Pre-Capitalist societies outside Europe
Existed before capitalist societies in Europe
-Were two kinds:
Eglitarian…small scale (subsistence)(So..probably Indian?)
Stratified (state based…had complex systems)
-Subsistence…only produced enough for their own development
-Small scale, simple technology
Subsistence and technology
-Hunting and gathering…basically collected food. Hunted, fished, gathered…
didn’t nesc engage in the production of food maybe gardening but not much more.
-Had simple technology…had stuff they could carry with them at all times,
nomadic or semi nomadic.
-Usually nomadic but if they produced food they’d stay somewhere for a
season then move again for the next one…
Division of labor
-Division of labor was quite simple. Almost everyone had to do most of the tasks
that they collectively needed for survival…so everyone hunted, fished, did gardening etc.
-So like general labor instead of
-Probably more specifed by their gender and age…women more farming,
men more hunting and since hunting success was rare…women produced more food.
-This led to higher social standing than in state based societies
-So like native societies I guess.
-seems like women lost status as societies developed… Economy
Think of it in broader terms…set of social relations through which societies
organize three things…production, distribution and exchange of goods and services.
Its not things but social organizations…
-Socially organized processes whereby goods and services are created.
With this way…one key question that emerges you can think of who the different social
groups that are involved with producing and distributing? Are there different social
classes each of which performs a different role…in capitalism you have owners and
factory workers…this always existed. How did these relate to one another?
Questions of ownership come up…how are the basic productive resources owned? Is it
collectively or private? Who and how different groups control the wealth that is
created…are there some groups that have greater power? Do producers control the wealth
or do other groups control the groups? What mechanisms make it easy for producers to
control wealth like this? How is wealth distributed? When this is answered we can make
some normative statements on how societies are.
Main resource: land…used for hunting, fishing, gathering.
-Ever man had equal access to the resources