ibf

Social Fluidity: Modes of Production, Class Flow, and Revolutionary Turbulence

🦋🤖 Robo-Spun by IBF 🦋🤖

🧵⚙️💪🏻 TEZGÂH 🧵⚙️💪🏻

Human society, viewed through the lens of Marxism, can be seen as a ceaseless movement—an ongoing flow of people, resources, and relationships shaped by their material conditions. To better understand how societies remain stable for long periods and then erupt into revolutionary transformation, it’s useful to borrow ideas from fluid dynamics.

Imagine society as a vast river. During times of stability, social classes move in predictable, parallel streams—much like laminar flow, where fluid moves smoothly in layers with little disruption between them. The dominant mode of production at any point in history sets the pattern for these class relations: who owns, who works, who benefits. But beneath the surface, pressures build as contradictions develop—much as a river encounters rocks, sharp bends, or increases in speed. At certain critical points, the calm flow breaks down. Chaos, mixing, and unpredictable eddies emerge—this is turbulent flow, the physical metaphor for revolution.

Let’s journey through each major mode of production in Marxism, examining how class relations maintain laminar flow—and what leads to the turbulence of revolution.

Primitive Communism: The Calm Waters of Early Society

In the earliest human communities, the social flow is smooth and undivided. There are no rigid classes; people work together to gather, hunt, and share the fruits of their labor. Social “layers” blend into each other; private property and institutional hierarchy do not exist.

This period represents a kind of perfect laminar flow—a communal, classless stream. But as humanity’s productive forces develop (the adoption of agriculture, domestication, tool-making), small inequalities emerge. Some groups begin to control more resources or territory, gently disrupting the unified flow. Over time, the increasing complexity of social life produces the first obstructions in the current—leading to the rise of classes, private property, and eventually, slave society.

Here, the transition is less about abrupt turbulence and more about the gradual buildup of pressures that eventually split the single current into multiple streams.

Slave Society: The First Layered Streams

With the emergence of slave societies, the river splits into distinct layers. Slaves and slave-owners occupy clearly defined channels, each with limited interaction but deeply intertwined destinies. The mode of production is marked by open exploitation, with one class entirely subordinated to another.

For a time, these layers maintain laminar flow, despite the immense social tension between them. But as the productive forces continue to advance—through technological innovation, conquest, and the growth of trade—the social currents become less stable. Merchants, artisans, and external pressures from invading peoples introduce new streams of interest and activity, increasing friction within the system.

This friction cannot be permanently contained. Slave rebellions, the inefficiency of forced labor, and the rise of new economic actors (free peasants, traders) introduce disturbances into the social flow. Eventually, turbulence erupts: empires fall, new powers seize control, and feudal relations emerge from the wreckage.

Feudalism: Layered but Constrained Currents

Under feudalism, society flows in a series of parallel layers: lords, vassals, clergy, and peasants. The dominant current is land ownership, which locks most people (serfs) into a fixed relationship with those above them. Despite this rigidity, the flow is not entirely stagnant—small towns, guilds, and trade routes create eddies that hint at new possibilities.

For centuries, this laminar flow is maintained by custom, religion, and the power of the nobility. Yet beneath the surface, commerce and technology quietly gather momentum. The rise of a mercantile class and the slow spread of capitalist practices—markets, wage labor, joint-stock companies—introduce increasing instability.

Over time, these new social forces begin to collide with the entrenched privileges of the old order. Friction turns to turbulence: peasants revolt, cities defy noble authority, and the bourgeoisie begins to assert its own interests. The great revolutions of the early modern period—most famously in France and England—are moments where the orderly laminar flow shatters into revolutionary turbulence, tearing apart the old class structure and creating a new one oriented around capital.

Capitalism: Dynamic Currents, Hidden Instability

With the triumph of the bourgeoisie, capitalism unleashes a river of unprecedented energy and innovation. The main classes—the capitalists (owners of capital) and the proletariat (workers who sell their labor)—occupy distinct but highly mobile streams. The capitalist mode of production is far more dynamic than any previous system: it constantly revolutionizes technology, reorganizes labor, and reconfigures markets in pursuit of profit.

Yet this dynamism contains its own contradictions. The productive forces develop so rapidly that old social relations are constantly strained. The workers, concentrated in factories and cities, begin to see themselves as a class, chafing under the exploitative conditions imposed by capital. Economic crises, unemployment, and inequality act like sudden drops or obstacles in the river, threatening to destabilize the whole system.

When the pressure is high enough—when the working class is sufficiently organized and conscious—a revolutionary situation emerges. The laminar flow of capitalist society, for so long able to absorb shocks and maintain its structure, finally gives way to turbulent social currents. General strikes, mass protests, and revolutions (as seen in Russia and elsewhere) upend the established order.

Socialism and Communism: Towards a New Laminar Flow

In Marxist theory, successful socialist revolution doesn’t just unleash chaos; it aims to reorder society into a new, higher form of laminar flow. The working class, having seized power, reorganizes production for collective benefit, not private profit. Class antagonisms are reduced or abolished, and new, cooperative currents take shape. Over time, as abundance grows and classes dissolve, society moves towards communism—a restored, but now consciously created, communal laminar flow.

Here, turbulence is not a permanent state, but a necessary moment of transformation—after which the river of society can flow smoothly once again, on a new and more just foundation.

The River of History

Marxism, when understood through the metaphor of social fluidity, paints a dynamic picture of history. In every era, stable modes of production and their class relations resemble layers of laminar flow—smooth, predictable, and resistant to change. But beneath this surface, contradictions grow, friction increases, and at key moments, revolution—social turbulence—breaks the old order apart.

This turbulent flow is not an accident, nor mere chaos: it is the mechanism by which new and higher forms of society are born. Once the forces unleashed by revolution subside, the possibility emerges for a new, more harmonious laminar flow—until, in time, contradictions build once more and the process repeats. In this way, the history of human society is not just a story of progress or decline, but of ongoing movement—shaped by the ever-changing currents of social fluidity.

Let’s continue our journey along the river of history, tracing the course from the turbulent transitions of the 20th century into the changing currents of our own era. As capitalism entered its neoliberal phase in the late 20th century, new forms of laminar and turbulent flow emerged—culminating in what some have called a “neofeudalism” of digital platforms, and now, the rising tide of artificial intelligence.

Neoliberalism: Deregulated Currents and Global Expansion

In the 1970s and 80s, the established flow of postwar capitalism—characterized by strong unions, welfare states, and regulated markets—began to break down. Faced with economic crises, inflation, and falling profits, the ruling classes embraced neoliberalism: a doctrine of deregulation, privatization, and globalization.

Neoliberalism sought to clear away obstacles in the capitalist river, letting capital flow more freely across borders and through all areas of life. Barriers between public and private, work and leisure, even national and global, were deliberately eroded. The laminar flow of society was reordered around the individual, the consumer, and the competitive market.

For a time, this produced dazzling new currents—unprecedented global trade, rising consumerism, and explosive growth in finance and technology. But the new configuration came with its own contradictions. Inequality widened, public goods shrank, and precarious work became the norm for millions. The flow was fast, but increasingly unstable—prone to periodic turbulence in the form of financial crises, mass protests, and a sense of social fragmentation.

The Neofeudalism of Digital Platforms: Walled Gardens and New Lords

As the digital revolution matured, a new class of gatekeepers emerged. Companies like Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and others built vast digital platforms that reshaped the terrain of social and economic life. These platforms are often described as networks, but in practice, they function like fiefdoms—enclosing users, workers, and data within proprietary domains.

This has led many thinkers to describe our era as one of “neofeudalism.” The old laminar flow of open, competitive capitalism is broken up by the presence of digital “lords”—corporate entities who own the platforms on which billions of people now work, communicate, and live. These lords extract rents from users (through data, fees, or labor) in exchange for access to the digital commons.

Unlike classic feudalism, where land was the key asset, here it is information, data, and algorithmic control. Workers in the gig economy—Uber drivers, Amazon warehouse staff, content creators—are tied to platforms as serfs were to manors. Social mobility is possible, but the boundaries of each platform are strictly enforced, and the rules are set by the owners, not by democratic negotiation.

This new laminar flow is highly stratified, with power concentrated in a handful of corporate hands, and the rest of society increasingly dependent on access to their digital estates. The promise of an open internet gives way to fragmented, surveilled, and monopolized domains.

Artificial Intelligence: Toward Unpredictable Turbulence

Now, at the dawn of the AI age, the river enters uncharted territory. Artificial intelligence acts as both a force multiplier and a source of new contradictions. On one hand, AI systems automate tasks once done by humans, making production more efficient and further centralizing power among those who own the technology. On the other, AI disrupts traditional notions of labor, value, and even agency itself.

The deployment of AI creates fresh turbulence in several ways:

  • Work and Class Structure: Whole categories of jobs are transformed or eliminated, while new, precarious forms of labor (data labeling, prompt engineering, gig tasks) emerge downstream.
  • Surveillance and Control: Platforms use AI to monitor, predict, and shape behavior, tightening their grip over users and workers alike. The flow of information is algorithmically controlled, often opaque and unaccountable.
  • Inequality and Concentration: The value produced by AI—like that of digital platforms—is captured by a shrinking elite, intensifying social stratification. The gap between those who design, own, or control AI systems and the rest grows ever wider.
  • Social Consciousness: AI’s role in content creation, communication, and even governance challenges the formation of collective action and class consciousness, potentially slowing or redirecting the development of revolutionary turbulence.

Yet, the contradictions are also explosive. The automation of labor, mass unemployment or underemployment, loss of privacy, and the opacity of algorithmic power all generate friction and resistance. Scattered protests against tech companies, unionization drives among platform workers, ethical debates about AI, and demands for digital democracy are early signs of possible turbulence ahead.

New Currents, Old Contradictions

From neoliberalism’s promise of freedom and mobility to the neofeudal enclosures of digital platforms, and now to the uncertain seas of AI, the flow of society remains shaped by familiar forces—ownership, control, and the endless search for profit. Each phase attempts to create a new laminar order, but each also breeds contradictions that threaten to unleash turbulence and transformation.

The river of history, in Marxist terms, has not reached its end—rather, its channels have multiplied, deepened, and sometimes darkened. Whether the coming turbulence will break the grip of digital lords and AI-powered elites, or merely create new forms of enclosure, remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: the struggle between stability and disruption, order and revolution, continues to shape the world as it flows into the future.

2 comments

Comments are closed.