Marxism vs Communism

[what's left?]

In so many terms, I’m still a novice, some please bear with me. After research I’m still confused on the differences between Marxism and Communist. If you’re Marxist are you a Communist or vice versa. With both ideologies so closely attached to Karl Marx, you would see where I draw confusion. Please discuss and educate me on the matter. Thanks!

[GPDP]

Communism is a socio-economic system based on classlessness and statelessness, while Marxism, in its various strands, is an ideology which posits a certain methodology for analyzing the world and critiquing capitalism, as well as offering a path towards the attainment of communism.

In other words, communism is the system which Marxism argues for and hopes to attain.

However, not all communists are Marxists. There are also anarchist communists, who approach communism from a different perspective, and add a critique of statism along with that of capitalism.

[ZeroNowhere]

There's no necessary difference (and nor is there any between Marxism and anarchism, may I add), but not all communists are Marxists. So, for example, we had the 'utopian communists' (Fourierites and such), there are non-Marxist anarchists, etc. And most people who call themselves either or both are neither.

[Rjevan]

In short: Communsim is an idea which can be found all troughout history, so it wasn't invented by Marx like some people think. As GPDP said, communism is a classless and stateless society with no privat property of means of production. Marx analysed history and the capitalist society and outlined how class war continues, the neccessity of a proletarian revolution crushing the bourgeois capitalist society and taking control of the means of production, establishing socialism (dictatorship of the proletariat) and finally achieveing communism this way.

So all Marxists are automatically communists but not all communists are Marxists, e.g. utopian communists and anarcho-communists as already mentioned above.

[NecroCommie]

Marxists are communists. Communists can be marxists, but can also be something else. This is as simple as it gets.

[Q]

Why is there an urge to repeat the point GPDP made over and over again?

[Lymos]

If I was confused, I would feel that the explanations given don't really explain the difference.

It would sound to me like someone saying: See this dolphin is a mammal and not a fish because they swim but a fish is a fish because they swim and don't rise up underwater as often.

Therefore for the sake of over-simplification, I would say the main difference (aside from the pedantic issues described already) is that Marx was proof that you don't need a man to be a political heavyweight intellectual, as long as you truly cared for the people and open your eyes to the problems of the world, you can contribute to politics and have your opinion be respected by the people and seen as revolutionary.

Marxism is about insecure people who feel they cannot support Marx's views without being a group cause it's not pop and... and... the guy has a worthwhile opinion so we should put an -ism to his beliefs. Basically kind of the same reasons why Christians today think they have the monopoly in supporting Christ' beliefs even when Christ never really said "spread and call yourselves Christians" and was all about humanity being the children of God.

Anyways, as with memes, it kind of stuck so now there's Marxism.

Communism is basically some people seeing the wonders of some communes and thinking: "Hey...you know all these talks by Marx of ruling class and...
Bourgeoisie

sucks! Let's make communes bigger and turn it into a guh...guh...government! Now take that, ruling class. Now we have a government system we can call our own that is for the people, by the people and ruled by the people.

[ZeroNowhere]

Why is there an urge to repeat the point GPDP made over and over again?
Because, well, look what happens when you don't. :unsure:

[el_chavista]

"Communism vs Marxism" is an unfortunate expression. Communism in its broadest sense is an egalitarian society. Marxism is a scientific way to build a communist society. Communists are those people striving for the society becomes communist. (Do these lines make sense in English? :unsure:)

[Lymos]

"Communism vs Marxism" is an unfortunate expression. Communism in its broadest sense is an egalitarian society. Marxism is a scientific way to build a communist society. Communists are those people striving for the society becomes communist. (Do these lines make sense in English? :unsure:)

Most part does but the very little parts that doesn't can confuse a novice.

Your usage of unfortunate for example does not really hint at whether you mean it's sad that the two has to go against each other. i.e. because of the use of the word "versus" or because they are one and the same.

Your usage of egalitarian doesn't really hint at whether you imply this is a utopian view or merely a dictionary definition of the term.

Your usage of scientific doesn't really hint whether you mean it actually has a well developed objective method behind it or you're simply saying that because there's a process, it is scientific.

Your last usage of communist, doesn't really explain whether you meant people striving for the utopia that is communism or you meant just people who want to convince other people to align and call themselves communist.

Although,

these vagueness can also be common among English speakers.

[Oneironaut]

If I was confused, I would feel that the explanations given don't really explain the difference.

It would sound to me like someone saying: See this dolphin is a mammal and not a fish because they swim but a fish is a fish because they swim and don't rise up underwater as often.

Therefore for the sake of over-simplification, I would say the main difference (aside from the pedantic issues described already) is that Marx was proof that you don't need a man to be a political heavyweight intellectual, as long as you truly cared for the people and open your eyes to the problems of the world, you can contribute to politics and have your opinion be respected by the people and seen as revolutionary.

Marxism is about insecure people who feel they cannot support Marx's views without being a group cause it's not pop and... and... the guy has a worthwhile opinion so we should put an -ism to his beliefs. Basically kind of the same reasons why Christians today think they have the monopoly in supporting Christ' beliefs even when Christ never really said "spread and call yourselves Christians" and was all about humanity being the children of God.

Anyways, as with memes, it kind of stuck so now there's Marxism.

Communism is basically some people seeing the wonders of some communes and thinking: "Hey...you know all these talks by Marx of ruling class and...
Bourgeoisie

sucks! Let's make communes bigger and turn it into a guh...guh...government! Now take that, ruling class. Now we have a government system we can call our own that is for the people, by the people and ruled by the people.

I'm inclined to think that you have never read any Marx. Would you care to elaborate how Marxism is about insecure people? I am having trouble understanding what you mean.

On another note, Marxism has nothing to do with communes. It is first and foremost an international working class movement. In fact, many Marxists do not support the idea of 'dropping out' and forming communes as that will render you useless in class struggle.

May I ask you one more time where you are finding your ideas about Marx? It certainly can't be from actually reading him.

[el_chavista]

Thanks, "Lymus". I just wanted to point out to "What's left" that his/her question is like discussing "capitalism vs neo-liberalism" or something. A subset of a set has its generic similarities and its specific differences.

[Lymos]

I'm inclined to think that you have never read any Marx. Would you care to elaborate how Marxism is about insecure people? I am having trouble understanding what you mean.

On another note, Marxism has nothing to do with communes. It is first and foremost an international working class movement. In fact, many Marxists do not support the idea of 'dropping out' and forming communes as that will render you useless in class struggle.

May I ask you one more time where you are finding your ideas about Marx? It certainly can't be from actually reading him.

I think you're missing the point because you're focusing on "Oh noes he's calling Marxists insecure!"

It's an issue that goes beyond Marxism.

People like joining groups. Groups like having a name that unifies them.

Sometimes it's convenience, sometimes it's groupthink.

Marx had an idea. That idea got a lot of following and was widely discussed.

You didn't need to call yourself Marxist for supporting his views.

Then as with the Christian analogy, groupthink sets in and memes set in etc. and then the word became widely used and became a convenience term.

Suddenly pro-Marx wasn't just an opinion or a discussion, it was a group symbol.

That in itself wasn't bad but when you combine people who had that view and the idea of liking communes in a wider setting (because of the whole "ruling class" theme), suddenly one caused another word to become popular and that word by virtue of being an effect of the cause became another word accepted by a large group and they became related ala Christian-Christ and swimming mammals-fish and it became much harder to understand the difference because there was the pedantic dictionary definition and then there was the history and then there is the tendency of what a wide group would set the limits as to what encompasses what. (See how in my first thread, some told me that anarcho-capitalism isn't anarchy and so on and so forth and yet with the same loose manner, communism can just as easily be anarcho-communism/anarcho-syndicalism)

As a novice, it can be confusing and will be what lead to the question of "What's different being Marxism and Communism?" but then unless you happen to get lucky and be replied by an expert who wouldn't copy paste but will present it to you in as accurate and "understandable to a novice" a manner, you get the dictionary definition and alot of people repeating the same substance over and over again. (as one of the previous poster alludes to)

It's like asking a teacher what is the difference between a fish and a swimming mammal and they will tell you of the breathing patterns. That is a correct answer but unless you buy it as dogma, you'll have to look at the history and details of the biological terms and so on and so forth like when did the phrase mammals first came to be use and when the words fish came to be used and when did dolphins officially became mammals in order for it to make sense to a novice.

I think you also mis-interpreted my use of communes. Communism = communes in a wider area. That's pretty much it. I wasn't implying that Marxists support dropping out and forming communes on a whim's notice.


Thanks, "Lymus". I just wanted to point out to "What's left" that his/her question is like discussing "capitalism vs neo-liberalism" or something. A subset of a set has its generic similarities and its specific differences.

I think he already gets that or at least the idea of that.

It is what confuses him.

He can't quite link the difference that makes one word a subset of the other word. To him, it comes off as synonyms.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Marxism is the whole socio-economic plan....basically.

Communism (as intended) is the end result of Marxism. A stateless, classless, moneyless society.

Modern Communism (Stalinism, Maoism, etc) essentially maintains a loose connection to Marx.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

If I was confused, I would feel that the explanations given don't really explain the difference.

If I wasn't confused when I started reading your posts in this thread, I certainly would be by the time I finished.

[Lymos]

If I wasn't confused when I started reading your posts in this thread, I certainly would be by the time I finished.

That's really inappropriate in a learning forum to say.

If you want to insult me, fine. Just don't do it in a reply where I intended to clarify.

You feel I am wrong or confusing and want to know? Ask me. Correct me. Do something more useful to the movement.

I'm no better than a novice myself and I'm new to the forums but at least respect the spirit of why this sub-forum was created.

[Oneironaut]

I think you're missing the point because you're focusing on "Oh noes he's calling Marxists insecure!"

It's an issue that goes beyond Marxism.

People like joining groups. Groups like having a name that unifies them.

Sometimes it's convenience, sometimes it's groupthink.

Marx had an idea. That idea got a lot of following and was widely discussed.

You didn't need to call yourself Marxist for supporting his views.

Then as with the Christian analogy, groupthink sets in and memes set in etc. and then the word became widely used and became a convenience term.

Suddenly pro-Marx wasn't just an opinion or a discussion, it was a group symbol.

That in itself wasn't bad but when you combine people who had that view and the idea of liking communes in a wider setting (because of the whole "ruling class" theme), suddenly one caused another word to become popular and that word by virtue of being an effect of the cause became another word accepted by a large group and they became related ala Christian-Christ and swimming mammals-fish and it became much harder to understand the difference because there was the pedantic dictionary definition and then there was the history and then there is the tendency of what a wide group would set the limits as to what encompasses what. (See how in my first thread, some told me that anarcho-capitalism isn't anarchy and so on and so forth and yet with the same loose manner, communism can just as easily be anarcho-communism/anarcho-syndicalism)

As a novice, it can be confusing and will be what lead to the question of "What's different being Marxism and Communism?" but then unless you happen to get lucky and be replied by an expert who wouldn't copy paste but will present it to you in as accurate and "understandable to a novice" a manner, you get the dictionary definition and alot of people repeating the same substance over and over again. (as one of the previous poster alludes to)

It's like asking a teacher what is the difference between a fish and a swimming mammal and they will tell you of the breathing patterns. That is a correct answer but unless you buy it as dogma, you'll have to look at the history and details of the biological terms and so on and so forth like when did the phrase mammals first came to be use and when the words fish came to be used and when did dolphins officially became mammals in order for it to make sense to a novice.

I think you also mis-interpreted my use of communes. Communism = communes in a wider area. That's pretty much it. I wasn't implying that Marxists support dropping out and forming communes on a whim's notice.



I think he already gets that or at least the idea of that.

It is what confuses him.

He can't quite link the difference that makes one word a subset of the other word. To him, it comes off as synonyms.

I'll be honest, I do follow some of what you are saying, but I don't quite understand what it is you are exactly trying to say and I did read your post multiple times. The only reason I quoted that you said Marxism is about insecure people was because that was exactly what you said. While I would say certainly there must be Marxists who are insecure, as there are in all levels of society, but what has that to bear upon Marx's works? It is quite a judgmental statement to say that all Marxists are insecure... but maybe I'm just misunderstanding your words.

[Lymos]

I'll be honest, I do follow some of what you are saying, but I don't quite understand what it is you are exactly trying to say and I did read your post multiple times. The only reason I quoted that you said Marxism is about insecure people was because that was exactly what you said. While I would say certainly there must be Marxists who are insecure, as there are in all levels of society, but what has that to bear upon Marx's works? It is quite a judgmental statement to say that all Marxists are insecure... but maybe I'm just misunderstanding your words.

Yes, it's just a misunderstanding.

You really have to go past the word Marxism and focus on the comfort level provided by being on a group compared to being separated individuals under no banner.

The way you're interpreting my words, you could easily just as say I meant all Christians are insecure when that's obviously not the point.

As for what I'm trying to say, I'm just replying to what the OP asked.

Like I said, I feel the answer by GPDP while stated well was also kinda generic to the point that there was a short pattern of not only repeating his words but some with less details than he did.

By generic, I don't mean inferior. Just that it's spoken in such a way that's similar to a dictionary. You can read it over and over again and see minor differences in the same definitions and it still can't capture the heart of the question to certain novices.

After all, if it was just that simple, the OP wouldn't have needed to ask in a forum where living humans react and reply. He would just as needed to go to your generic online dictionary site and compare and contrast the different dictionary terms.

...but as he said, he read up and got confused.

That's why I decided to just present a different perspective. One that uses more analogies and is a less academically accepted answer that doesn't rely on pedantry.

[core_1]

I have to ask but
troll?

[Lymos]

I don't know why answering this would make any difference since a troll would just naturally deny that they are a troll but the answer is no.

[ZeroNowhere]

I have to ask but
troll?
Eh, more along the lines of psychologist.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

That's really inappropriate in a learning forum to say.

If you want to insult me, fine. Just don't do it in a reply where I intended to clarify.

You feel I am wrong or confusing and want to know? Ask me. Correct me. Do something more useful to the movement.

I'm no better than a novice myself and I'm new to the forums but at least respect the spirit of why this sub-forum was created.
Sorry. But I did think that GPDP's post (and the ones that came after basically repeating it) was clear and helpful, whereas your posts do genuinely confuse me.