How are these tendencies different?

[The CPSU Chairman]

First of all, i'm new here, so go easy on me. :)

I always hear about anarchists, anarcho-communists, anarcho-syndicalists, left communists, and a few other similar things, and from what little I understand of them, they sound basically the same. What makes them different from one another?

And this might seem like an incredibly newbie question, but in general how are anarchism and Communism different? I mean, aside from the path they take to their final goals. From what I understand, it sounds like they're basically the same thing except Communists advocate the existence of a revolutionary Socialist state to help lay the groundwork for the final stage which is Communism, whereas anarchists seek to jump straight to Communism because they oppose the existence of any state, even a Socialist one. Am I correct?

Thanks in advance. :)

[Nox]

Anarchist is a general word to describe all Libertarians, capitalist or communist.

Anarcho-Communist is a word to describe all Libertarian Communists.

Anarcho-Syndicalism is a type of Libertarian Communism.

Left Communism is a far-left branch of Marxism that shares many views with Anarchists.

I've only been an Anarchist for about a week, so I could be wrong.

[Nox]

Marxists use the state to achieve world revolution, Anarchists don't.

Also, think of Communism as a spectrum, ranging from the left (libertarian) to the right (authoritarian), Anarchists and Left Communists are to the left, Orthodox Marxists are in the centre, and Marxist-Leninists are to the right.

[Rooster]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't anarcho-syndicalism based on the labour movement such as trade unions? And possibly that the people who work in industries should control those industries, such as railway men should run the railways (such as through their union). I know that's kind of a stupid sentence but it's in comparison to like a state run railway of any kind and so on.

[pax et aequalitas]

Anarcho-syndicalists believe that stuff needs to be organised like a trade union. They can be can anarcho-communists as well, but don't have to be, nor do all anarcho-communists have to be anarcho-syndicalists.

Left-communists are more broad and are less anarchist.

[Sentinel]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't anarcho-syndicalism based on the labour movement such as trade unions? And possibly that the people who work in industries should control those industries, such as railway men should run the railways and such. I know that's kind of a stupid sentence but it's in comparison to like a state run railway of any kind and so on. Anarcho-syndicalism indeed means revolutionary (anarchist) trade unionism. However, also orthodox marxists (trotskyists) wish to nationalise the industries, banks, infrastructure etc under workers democratic control, support independent and militant unions and so on.

But unlike the syndicalists we believe that it is the revolutionary party of the working class, rather than the unions, that should and will play the main role in the proletarian revolution, and that the revolution should lead to the forming of a socialist workers state rather than a stateless federation of unions, councils etc.


think of Communism as a spectrum, ranging from the left (libertarian) to the right (authoritarian), Anarchists and Left Communists are to the left, Orthodox Marxists are in the centre, and Marxist-Leninists are to the right.
That is in my opinion essentially correct, even though it of course depends on how many groups/tendencies one chooses to separate from each other. For instance if you line up all one million tendencies of anarchism that would obviously put marxism more to the 'right' on the scale, and vice versa.

[Rooster]

Anarcho-syndicalism indeed means revolutionary (anarchist) trade unionism. However, also orthodox marxists (trotskyists) wish to nationalise the industries, banks, infrastructure etc under workers democratic control, support independent and militant unions and so on.

So that's how it's different from regular anarchist trends, that it's focused more on the labour movement? And from Bakunin who thought that the real revolutionary class was the lumpen-proletariat?

[Sentinel]

Yes, as said it is by definition revolutionary unionism. Syndicalists think that an authentic worker-controlled revolution can best be achieved by organising the workers in revolutionary unions. In these, the workers will both become radicalised by confronting the employers, and learn to make decisions by themselves in a democratic fashion in order to be able to govern the post-revolutionary society.

It's not a stupid theory, but has imo some vital flaws. It isolates the radical workers from those organised in the mass unions, and mot importantly ignores other equally important venues of struggle. From personal experience I can also add that it's generally quite hard to get workers to join such a confrontative union and take up struggle against their employers unless provoked -- ie unless their conditions, rights, wages etc are either already under direct attack, or simply are severely worse than usual to begin with.

This depends on the circumstances, of course, and there are many individual examples of successful syndicalist struggle in different situations. But generally I've learned that this is pretty much how it is.

[The CPSU Chairman]

Thanks guys! I'm finding your discussion quite helpful. :)