Talk:Pre-industrial society

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"A traditional authority. Power was manifested in many forms of personalistic authorities instead of through an impersonal state or bureaucracy."

I'm a bit unclear about the meaning of this — does it imply that bureaucracy did not exist prior to industrialisation? Clearly not true. What are "personalistic authorities"? As opposed to today's officials of mayors, presidents, etc...

Also there seems to be a lot of conflation of capitalism with industrial society in this article, which doesn't seem entirely accurate to me. Anybody have any explanations? Peregrine981 06:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I prefer the former redaction. The power in preindustrial societies is personal, even paternalist. The use of personal authority (and paternalism) in industrial societies is a sign of conservadurism or (in a different but no opposite way) fascism.--Ángel Luis Alfaro 09:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC) Sorry for cite wikipedia in spanish: Aunque burocracia y estado existen en sociedades tradicionales, el Estado moderno no se desarrolla plenamente hasta que el Estado Liberal se impone sobre los particularismos propios del Antiguo Régimen. En sociedades preindustriales puede ejercerse un poder personal, incluso paternalista, pero en ese caso se entiende como una pervivencia preindustrial, de orientación reaccionaria o conservadora, incluso, desde otra postura, fascista.

Another thing: in spanish wikipedia we have translated the article, and added two comments: 1-the concept (marxist) of alienation of work in first industrial revolution (in opposition to the idea of few abilities in pre industial) 2-the bycicle as a revolutionary mean of communication (allowing even biological mixture between human comunities not so possible before). I dare to introduce an image (funny I tink), but not text: my english is not well enough, perhaps somebody wants to do himself.--Ángel Luis Alfaro 09:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you could explain what you mean by personal or paternalistic? Surely personal and paternalistic authority exists in industrial societies as well - ie kings, hereditary monarchs, cults of personality etc...? Also, if you think of fairly developed pre-industrial societies, such as the Roman Empire, or perhaps the French Empire before the revolution, they had fairly large and developed bureaucracies. Peregrine981 21:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry for answer too late (I use to write in es:wikipedia). Burocracy or even State must be preindustrial, but modern state is out of range in comparation. About what I understand for personal or paternalistic, your examples are quite well of non-modern survival or reactionary orientations (even in cult of personality of stalinism or maoism, that many had compared to zarist or chinese imperial backgraund). A couple of references: Michel Foucault (in spanish Vigilar y Castigar french Surveiller et punir, Vigilance and punsih ¿?) and Ernst Kantorowicz (in spanish Los dos cuerpos del rey, The two bodies of the king¿?). There is a spanish historian of law that I like Bartolomé Clavero (Tantas personas como estados, So many people like states ¿?).--Ángel Luis Alfaro 16:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)