5 thoughts on “Society Against the State

  1. Bu kitabın ezberbozan bir yanı vardı. En azından benim için. Toplum olarak kendimizi aradığımız [yanardöner gibi bir devir batılılaşıp bir devir doğululaşarak] bir dönemde, örnek aldığımız dayanaklarımızı sorgulatan bir kitap oldu. Batı benmerkezciliğine net bir eleştiri bu. Devlete dair daha çok soru sorduracak bir kitap.

    aklıma gelen 3 alıcı grubuna kişisel notum:

    – devleti, bir de devletsiz toplumlarla karşılaştırma yaparak anlayayım diyenlerin okuması gerekli. [Uzmanı değilim, nacizane görüşüm

  2. Is Clastres the red-headed step-child of anthropology? I’ve got two anthro degrees, and had to come to him via Tiqqun. While I’ve been forced to read a good chunk of the French anthro canon, nary a word of Clastres. I don’t think it’s quite a conspiracy, but I question this strange “hiding” of anthro texts that hint at anarchism (like Clastres, I also had to read Graeber on my own).

    Clastres’anthropology is SO GOOD, but can still be critiqued. At times I felt like he was homogenizing, what he ca

  3. يطرح بيار كلاستر في مجتمع اللادولة هذا الرد العنيف نحو الدول المتحضرة إقتصادياً وسياسياً إلا أنها عن طريق توظيفها لسلطة بروحٍ شريرة صنعت ما يسمى بالفقر وضياع الموارد وظهور الفجوات الكبيرة بين الطبقات الإجتماعية. إن مجتمع اللادولة هنا هو المجتمع البدائي الذي لا يسمح لزعيمه بأن يكون مستبداً! فالزعيم داخل المجتمع البدائي مقيد بحدود تم اختيارها. كمهارته الخطابية وحنكته في المهارات ونشاطات الحرب وقيادة المجتمع نحو التفوق، أما غير ذلك فهو مختص بالأفراد فلا يوجد سلطة تجعله يقيد المجتمع بأفكاره وأراءه و

  4. Having read Clastres later Archeology of Violence (you can see my review here), I was prepared to be blown away by this one (after all, the production/jacket is much higher end stuff, which means it’s better, right?).

    But I was instead disappointed. He says essentially similar things, but in more theoretical ways than he does in the other book. This made it harder for me to stay interested. Additionally, there were a couple of spots where he seemed to romanticize the indigenous people, giving th

  5. Clastres main thesis through this book is that stateless societies are not under-developed, but a result of conscious and active organization against statist structures.

    Even though some of his ideas are a bit dated by now and come across as typical arrogancy of a western scholar, Clastres does deserve credit for being one the first western intellectuals to seriously point out that maybe people living in these societies actually choose their lives.

Leave a Reply