The difference between left-communism and anarcho-communism

[Black_Rose]

I know they consider themselves less authoritarian than Trots and MLs, but I don't know the difference in their ideology or political theory. It also seems that the left communists are more explicitly antagonistic and strident towards ML regimes while anarcho-communists are implicitly against the ML regimes since their political philosophy emphasizes the corrupting nature of political authority in general.

I have a lot more respect for the anarchists than left-communists.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Left Communists are Marxists, anarcho-communists are Anarchists, largely.

[Movimento Sem Terra]

Left Communist are the pure form of Marxism and they want the people lead the revolution after it's establish the Socialist Republic of EUA . They believe in Vanguard Party to help people to get more knowledge about marxism and help them in directions to fallow . Anarcho-communist are more anarchist so they don't want Vanguard Party and all the other stuff .

[Brosa Luxemburg]

I know they consider themselves less authoritarian than Trots and MLs,
Actually, most of us Left-Communists feel that terms such as authoritarianism and libertarianism are useless without a proper class analysis behind them.


but I don't know the difference in their ideology or political theory.
Read these works to get a very general idea.
Bordiga Versus Pannekoek (http://libcom.org/library/bordiga-versus-pannekoek)
Open Letter To Comrade Lenin (http://www.marxists.org/archive/gorter/1920/open-letter/index.htm)

Left Communists are not against a transitional state to reach a classless and stateless society and are not against using the party as a revolutionary organ of proletariat power and struggle.

[Misocratist]

Left Communists are Marxists, anarcho-communists are Anarchists, largely.

Apples are the fruits of apple trees, largely.

Seriously though, it's an illusion to think that every labels have a clear meaning behind them, which one has to "uncover" or "clarify" as if they were natural phenomeons.

What does it mean to be a "marxist"? Many, if not most anarcho-communists are marxists in that they use Marx's Labour Theory of Value to criticize capitalism, and quite a few also use Marx's Historical Materialism as a tool for the analysis of society and culture (though sometime crudely, as when they remark that "The police is there to protect rich people...", i.e. that the state is part of the superstructure of the capitalist mode of production). Thus, there isn't much of a distinction between that kind of anarcho-communists and "anti-autoritarian marxists" such as council-communists; at best, some left communists may identify more explicitely with the writings of Marx, despite thinking pretty much the same thing as anarcho-communists, who merely happen to identify less formally with Marx.

Yet again, let's not forget that those labels are ultimately meaningless unless they are practical, which they are not.

[Welshy]

Apples are the fruits of apple trees, largely.

Seriously though, it's an illusion to think that every labels have a clear meaning behind them, which one has to "uncover" or "clarify" as if they were natural phenomeons.

What does it mean to be a "marxist"? Many, if not most anarcho-communists are marxists in that they use Marx's Labour Theory of Value to criticize capitalism, and quite a few also use Marx's Historical Materialism as a tool for the analysis of society and culture (though sometime crudely, as when they remark that "The police is there to protect rich people...", i.e. that the state is part of the superstructure of the capitalist mode of production). Thus, there isn't much of a distinction between that kind of anarcho-communists and "anti-autoritarian marxists" such as council-communists; at best, some left communists may identify more explicitely with the writings of Marx, despite thinking pretty much the same thing as anarcho-communists, who merely happen to identify less formally with Marx.

Yet again, let's not forget that those labels are ultimately meaningless unless they are practical, which they are not.

While I agree with your general point, I think what The Boss is referring to is that Left Communists come from a marxist tradition (this does have some impact on specific positions like the state) whereas anarchist-communists come from the anarchist tradition. This distinction as you point out does get pretty meaningless for some parts of the marxist and anarchist traditions.

[Yuppie Grinder]

I know they consider themselves less authoritarian than Trots and MLs, but I don't know the difference in their ideology or political theory. It also seems that the left communists are more explicitly antagonistic and strident towards ML regimes while anarcho-communists are implicitly against the ML regimes since their political philosophy emphasizes the corrupting nature of political authority in general.

I have a lot more respect for the anarchists than left-communists.

Left-communists do not consider themselves any less "authoritarian" than Trots, and as Brosa Luxemburg correctly stated above, they do not feel loaded words like "authoritarian" and "libertarian" mean anything without class analysis behind them.
Unlike anarcho-communists, left-coms do not buy into the liberal idea that power corrupts.
The differences between anarcho-communists and left-communists are vast. They have very little in common besides their end goal.

[Blake's Baby]

I'd disagree. I don't there's a fundamental political position that I hold now that I didn't hold when I was an Anarchist (and I considered myself an Anarchist-Communist).

State capitalist nature of USSR - check.
Opposition to all states and bourgeoisie's wars - check.
Opposition to parliamentary democracy as a force for social transformation - check.

I was less consistent as an Anarchist, having a very woolly conception of class conciousness; and I was less hard on the possibilities of using unions to promote working-class action. But in general my formal political positions have been pretty consistent in the move from Anarchism to Left Communism.

[Revolution starts with U]

Anarchists don't so much believe power corrupts, as they believe power attracts oppurtunists; ie, that politicians are just that, politicians. This has been a truism since day one of politics. Sulla understood this when he codified the Corsus Honorum (Course of Honor), and I can't fathom why people think anything has changed since then.

[Art Vandelay]

Anarchists don't so much believe power corrupts, as they believe power attracts oppurtunists; ie, that politicians are just that, politicians. This has been a truism since day one of politics. Sulla understood this when he codified the Corsus Honorum (Course of Honor), and I can't fathom why people think anything has changed since then.

And the material conditions, especially during times of social upheaval, creates situations ripe for opportunism; not sure what is liberal about that analysis.