Acephalous Societies

Theory on the evolution of egalitarianism and its relevance to anthropology is described in three sections. The first section carefully defines and delimits usage of the term egalitarianism in anthropology, outlines the form of social organization empirically observed in egalitarian societies, and clarifies the difference between egalitarian and acephalous societies. The second section describes multidisciplinary perspectives on the egalitarian disposition and behaviors found in humans, and how these contrast with those of nonhuman primates. Theories on how these behaviors and dispositions may have evolved are summarized. Finally, the roles of gender relations, sexual reproduction strategies, and cooperative breeding are mentioned in relation to the theory on the evolution of egalitarianism.

“Primitive, tribal societies appear…to lack ‘law’ in the form that it exists in so-called advanced societies. The apparent absence of the institutions that we normally associate with legal systems – courts, law enforcement authorities, prisons, legal codes – [has] led to the conclusion that these communities were governed by custom rather than law.”
(Understanding Jurisprudence R Wacks 2nd Edition [2009], p.244)
To accept the statement acephalous societies lack law in the form that exists within an institutionalised state society one has to draw a conclusion from not only the divergence between custom and law but also several competing schools of thought within the field of anthropology.  This paper will examine briefly the importance of legal anthropology when applying a cross-cultural approach to find a universal definition against the ethnocentricity of one-system-fits-all, the concept of social mobility, and different validations of law and laws as rules. A critical evaluation will be drawn of the variance between function as opposed to form of a custom, customary law and law itself. Further examination will consider, by probing different anthropological viewpoints, if reciprocal economic obligation as a method of internalised self-regulation is an important mechanism to a stateless society as a norm of compromise as opposed to the external regulation of force. Deducing from the evidence, concluding remarks will consider the statement that face-to-face communities were governed by custom rather than law as either an affirmative or negative.

by Carl Taylor

Since the official close of colonialism, Africa has become a proving grounds for social and governmental policies. Almost unanimously, people within the national boarders of each state have suffered as a direct result of poor policy implementation by their respective states. This treatise attempts to offer perspective on the seldom examined notions of anti-statist organisation, revealing the contemporary Westphalian-modeled African state is actually an anti- African construct. Thus, the polices implemented by several of these states have served only to perpetuate the same subjugation experienced by generations prior under colonialism. To remedy this situation, I propose an eventual implementation of antistatist policies which bear resemblance to the organisational mechanisms of various African acephalous segmentary communities, some of which have maintained their social structure for centuries and may be still be observed today. I further expand my argument for antistatism as a rational and ultimately necessary collective human aspiration.

Der Beitrag begibt sich auf die Spuren anarchistischer Motive im Denken des jungen Walter Benjamin. Der Text zielt darauf ab, den biographischen Entstehungskontext dieser Motive auszuleuchten, ihren Zusammenhang zur jüdischen Überlieferung herzustellen und ihnen schließlich bis in die Sprachtheorie nachzuspüren. Dazu wird erstens die Genese dieses anarchischen Impulses im Zusammenhang prägender Jugenderfahrungen Benjamins zwischen assimiliertem Milieu und Bildungsbürgertum rekonstruiert. Die spätere Hinwendung zur jüdischen Überlieferung ist damit bereits anarchistisch grundiert. Begrifflich findet sie ihren Ausdruck im ‚theokratischen Anarchismus‘. Ihm ist dann der zweite Abschnitt gewidmet. Im dritten Schritt richtet sich das Interesse auf die Sprachtheorie des jungen Benjamin. Im Licht des ‚theokratischen Anarchismus‘ treten dann vor allem ihre herrschaftsbeschränkenden und –vermeidenden Motive hervor. Der abschließende Abschnitt umreißt einige weiterführende Überlegungen zu einem mit der jüdischen Überlieferung verbundenen und auf Herrschaftslosigkeit scharfgestellten Denken des Politischen.

Theory on the evolution of egalitarianism and its relevance to anthropology is described in three sections. The first section carefully defines and delimits usage of the term egalitarianism in anthropology, outlines the form of social organization empirically observed in egalitarian societies, and clarifies the difference between egalitarian and acephalous societies. The second section describes multidisciplinary perspectives on the egalitarian disposition and behaviors found in humans, and how these contrast with those of nonhuman primates. Theories on how these behaviors and dispositions may have evolved are summarized. Finally, the roles of gender relations, sexual reproduction strategies, and cooperative breeding are mentioned in relation to the theory on the evolution of egalitarianism.