Communism as a "Western" concept

[Invincible Summer]

So I was talking to a classmate about Anarchism and Communism, and he stated that both are concepts born from middle-class Western males, and that trying to promote such an ideology is equivalent to hegemony.

His argument was that the ideas of a white man in Europe are not going to necessarily inspire a woman in Thailand, because "we all struggle differently."

I feel he has a point, but I was wondering what the rest of you have to say about this.

[mykittyhasaboner]

That is simply bullshit.

'Communism' as an ideology, and international movement encompass so many more ideas and works than Marx. Also, your classmate's dismissal of Marx (or Engels) as middle class reeks of pretentious liberalism.

[Anarkiwi]

anarchy is a movement of indivdual freedom so
the girl in thailand strugles diffrent then her sister
but the struggles the same

class struggle:reda::star2::hammersickle:

[ʇsıɥɔɹɐuɐ ıɯɐbıɹo]

Tell him compassion is universal and freedom knows no borders.

[Black Dagger]

and he stated that both are concepts born from middle-class Western males, and that trying to promote such an ideology is equivalent to hegemony.

He's right that lots of the 'prominent' marxist and anarchist 'thinkers' ('famous' leftists who wrote stuff people reprint today) were white european men, some of whom were not working class folks. But what about marxist and anarchist women and their contributions? Don't they count? What emphasis one places on any dead personage is really up to the individual, if i had the inclination i could read only the writings of dead japanese anarchists, female or male. Anarchism is not the property of white males, the idea that people should be in control of their own lives - of non-hierarchal decision-making etc., of anarchist organisation, transcends time and space. The idea that no one should be a slave or a master, the pursuit of full, meaningful freedom for the individual in it's fullest expression, the freedom of all in a society based on equality of opportunity, mutual aid and solidarity these are all impulses that can be found across time in varied forms, from ancient cultures to adhoc worker organisations. I don't mean to historicise anarchism here, but rather the threads or ideas that run through it. These are not ideas people usually find repulsive, alien, inherently male or european. What some people may find repulsive are the ideas of self-identifying anarchists, people who rally against social politics or middle class folks who take class politics out of the equation or are just naive.

One could also criticise anarchist histories of the spanish anarchists for example, for their neglect of female anarchists, and their struggles during this time - such as the Mujer Libre movement (which in a review of civil war literature i did some time ago, either rated mention in a sentence or two or went unnamed in books spanning hundreds of pages).

So there are criticisms to be made of anarchism, anarchists etc. on the basis of racism, essentialism, chauvinism, sexism etc. but i don't see how these criticisms entail a rejection of the principals or ideas of anarchism as essentially sexist, racist etc. as unlike marxism for example, anarchism does not posit a historical analysis rooted in an ethnocentric tradition (historical materialism), the problems are with anarchists, groups, individuals, and not at the level of ideas, or goals.



His argument was that the ideas of a white man in Europe are not going to necessarily inspire a woman in Thailand, because "we all struggle differently."

A 'woman in thailand' might find the idea of 'anarchy' horrifying but the idea of her workplace being self-organised and controlled as something of a dream come true! Language and the superficial elements of ideas can turn people off, confuse, annoy whatever, what matters is whether the core ideas ring true or not.
I don't buy the idea that a 'woman in thailand' - which i'm going to take as a reference to the global working class rather than 'a rich woman in thailand' or something - would find the ideas of direct-democracy, workers councils etc. 'offensive', 'male' and 'western'. I've no doubt there are probably people in thailand who already have these ideas, put them into pratice and they might not even call themselves anarchists, who cares?

[Manifesto]

So I was talking to a classmate about Anarchism and Communism, and he stated that both are concepts born from middle-class Western males, and that trying to promote such an ideology is equivalent to hegemony.

His argument was that the ideas of a white man in Europe are not going to necessarily inspire a woman in Thailand, because "we all struggle differently."

I feel he has a point, but I was wondering what the rest of you have to say about this.
Is this talking about Anarcho-Communism or just Anarchy and Communism?

[ZeroNowhere]

Marx was petit-bourgeois?
Also, that's hardly much of a point, it's more of just an ad hominem (that is, the ideas were created by Western males, and therefore they don't apply to others). As for hegemony, that was just pulled out of their ass, IMHO. It also reeks of populist rhetoric.

[CommunityBeliever]

I suppose he is saying he would prefer it if a wage slave wrote the Communist Manifesto? Except for that slaves are not taught to read let alone write :cool:

[ZeroNowhere]

I suppose he is saying he would prefer it if a wage slave wrote the Communist Manifesto? Except for that slaves are not taught to read let alone write :cool:They are, actually.

[Anarkiwi]

who cares if he was a western man or a asian
we are all human so what he repersented repersents all people.