from Introduction to Exchange Styles
What about the state societies that emerged after the clan societies? It appears to be based exclusively on violent deprivation, but at the same time it is based on “exchange. It is a kind of exchange that is not usually considered an exchange, but in which one receives protection if one submits. (Note 5) The state begins as conquest and domination by violence, but it can only become a continuing domination when the submissive actively submits. It becomes possible when, by submitting, one receives protection, that is, when the domination-subjugation relationship becomes a kind of exchange. This brings about a “power” that is different from violence. This force binds the dominant as well as the subjugated. If the dominant is unable to protect the ruled, the ruler is disqualified from holding that position. In this sense, the relationship is bilateral (reciprocal) and, in a sense, related to Mode A of exchange. I call this style of exchange B.
(Note 5) Hobbes. in his “Levathan” believed that a state of peace is created by a social compact out of a “state of nature” in which all men contend with all men. This social contract, he said, is “a fear-enforced contract. It is an exchange. It is an exchange, because those who obedience “gain their life on condition of obedience. The ruler, on the other hand, is obligated to carry it out. In this sense, it can be said that Hobbes considered the state from the perspective of Mode B of exchange. However, since Locke, people have thought of the “social contract” in terms of C.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/交換様式B using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.