The Evolution of the Formation of Society is a Process of Natural History

One of the core standpoints of historical materialism. In Capital, Marx viewed the evolution of the economic formation of society as a process of natural history.

The “formation of society” refers to the unity of the economic foundation and superstructure that matches a certain development stage of the productive forces. The scope of the social formation includes all social systems such as politics, economy and culture at a certain stage of the human society’s development. The social formation is concrete and historical, and the nature of society is different due to the different basic contradictions that play a decisive role. In every formation of society, the dominating production relations define the main characteristics of the economic foundation and superstructure in the society. However, it is a common law for different social formations that the production relations must adapt to the productive forces and the superstructure must adapt to the economic foundation. Lenin pointed out in his article “What the ‘Friends of the People’ Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats” that “while explaining the structure and development of the given formation of society exclusively through production relations, he (Marx) nevertheless everywhere and incessantly scrutinised the superstructure corresponding to these production relations and clothed the skeleton in flesh and blood.”

There have been approximately five formations of society in the human history, primitive, slavery, feudal, capitalist and socialist society. The development and evolution of the formation of society conforms with the law and the aim. Lenin pointed out that: “Just as Darwin…was the first to put biology on an absolutely scientific basis… so Marx put an end to the view of society being a mechanical aggregation of individuals which allows of all sorts of modification at the will of the authorities (or, if you like, at the will of society and the government) and which emerges and changes casually, and was the first to put sociology on a scientific basis by establishing the concept of the economic formation of society as the sum-total of given production relations, by establishing the fact that the development of such formations is a process of natural history.”

First, the development process of the formation of society conforms with the natural law. Nature is never a product of human beings. On the contrary, human society is the result of long-term development of nature. Compared with human society, nature is preexisting, and its own objective laws are not subject to human will. Moreover, as a part of nature, the existence and development of human society is also an objective historical process, that is, it is not determined by subjective will and spiritual things, but a material process based on respecting and applying objective laws. The development level of productive forces faced by each generation before engaging in production is objective, the scope of nature known to human beings is objective, and even the material tools used by human beings for production are part of the objective real world. Therefore, the realization of human goals will never exceed the permitted range of natural laws. In this sense, the development of the formation of society is a process that conforms with the natural law.

Second, the development process of the formation of society conforms with human purpose. Animals can only passively adapt to nature, but human beings can not only understand the essential laws of nature through observing phenomena, but also use the laws to serve their own aims. Practice is an activity in which the subjective is seen from the objective and a process in which the subjective purpose is realized. In this process, human beings could not only change the world, but could also create history. Therefore, the development of the formation of society is process that conforms with human purpose, and a historical process.

Lenin insisted on and defended the Marxist theory of the formation of society in his struggle with Russian Narodism. Mikhailovsky, a representative Narodnik, denied Marx’s materialist conception of history and belittled Capital as a mere “economic theory”. Lenin regarded Mikhailovsky’s opinion as a vulgar view totally inconsistent with the fact. Lenin pointed out that sociologists in the past only talked about human nature and justice and were rapt in childish moral preaching. They were only interested in superficial theoretical forms of morality, politics and law, and either turned a blind eye to the causes and social conditions that nurtured these theories, or simply and roughly attributed them to human mind, without realizing that the theories were only products of specific social and historical relations. It was the concept of the formation of society that elevated the study of social phenomena from repeated records and evaluations to strict scientific analysis. Lenin said that “another reason why this hypothesis for the first time made a scientific sociology possible was that only the reduction of social relations to production relations and of the latter to the level of the productive forces, provided a firm basis for the conception that the development of formations of society is a process of natural history. And it goes without saying that without such a view there can be no social science.”

Based on the conditions of the era and Russian characteristics, Lenin creatively developed the theory of social formation. On the one hand, Lenin revealed the capitalist nature of Russian society on the eve of revolution by examining Russia’s social division of labor and domestic market in response to Russian Narodniks’ attempt to deny the inevitability of Russia’s socialist path. On the other hand, Lenin explained the relationship between unity and diversity in the evolution of social formations in view of the new features and particularity of the Russian revolutionary road. He pointed out that the general law of world historical development does not exclude the particularity of individual development stages in the form or sequence of development, but is premised on it. The Narodniks did not even realize that Russia is a country between western civilized countries and eastern countries that were eventually involved in civilization due to war; therefore, Russia could and would certainly show certain particularities, which of course conformed to the general development path of the world, but made the Russian Revolution different from previous revolutions in western European countries, and these particularities would produce some local new things in eastern countries.

Lenin’s important interpretation of the evolution theory of the formation of society was a further enrichment and development of Marxism.