Log in

View Full Version : Anarcist V.S. Communist



Casanova
21st August 2004, 18:00
The short time that I have been here I have learned alot now I am stuck between being a Anarchist or a Communist I just need some help. Don't tell me what to be just try to help me please. This is killing me.

The Feral Underclass
21st August 2004, 18:14
Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 08:00 PM
The short time that I have been here I have learned alot now I am stuck between being a Anarchist or a Communist I just need some help. Don't tell me what to be just try to help me please. This is killing me.
First of all, welcome to Che-Lives :)

Revolutionary politics is so complicated sometimes so I will try and be as clear as possible.

There is no real difference between anarchism and communism, but at the same time there is a fundamental difference.

What I mean by that is anarchism and communism as political and social theories are exactly the same. They both advocate a stateless, classless society without governments in the sense that we know them today with leaders at the top making decisions.

When Karl Marx talked about communism he talked about stages to achieving it. When Marx analysed society and developed his theories he came to the conclusion that in order to achieve communism you had to go through a transitional phaze which in the classic marxist term they call the "dictatorship of the proletariat" but is often called socialism or the first stage of communism.

Marx argued that you couldn't go straight from capitalism to communism and that you must have this transitional stage in order to take power into the hands of the workers, organise society and defeat the capitalists. He argued that when the time was right this dictatorship of the proletariat idealised in the state, would eventually wither away. This is what they call Marxism.

Marxism is often called communism and this is where the big difference between anarchism and communism happens. Anarchists believe that this transitional stage is unnecessary and that it is in fact a hinderance on achieving communism. The difference between anarchist communism and marxist communism is that the anarchists believe the state and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" will always corrupt, leading to men like Stalin and Mao and that the state must be destroyed from the beginning and the process of creating a communist society is started as soon as the revolution begins.

To go further into the differences between anarchism and communism is the economic theories. There are many different variants of anarchism which advocate many different types of economic managment. Communism advocates, as Marx put it, "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need." This basically means that everyone works as much as is needed and they take back from society what they need.

For your information I am an anarchist communist.

If you have other questions or I have said something which you dont understand just ask away.

Casanova
21st August 2004, 18:38
That whole like speech you gave I printed out if thats okay? Cause I just like blew my mind, but anyways thanks

Djehuti
22nd August 2004, 01:42
Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 06:00 PM
The short time that I have been here I have learned alot now I am stuck between being a Anarchist or a Communist I just need some help. Don't tell me what to be just try to help me please. This is killing me.
You can be both. Anarchists also wants communism, all important anarchists have been anarcho communists.

If there is a clash, its rather between anarchism and marxism (a tool for analyzis), then between anarchism and communism (a material movement).

But in much, anarchists and marxist have come closer together...i know many anarchists that I have much more in common with (opinions) then I have with "communists", marxist-leninists och trotskyites for example (if you could call them communists)...



The Anarchist Tension
"When Karl Marx talked about communism he talked about stages to achieving it."

Hrmm....i dont really agree...Ofcource revolution is a process but Marx never really talket about "stages" in anything, though his followers often did. Marx him self was rather very anti-schematic and anti-deterministic. But very missunderstood.


"When Marx analysed society and developed his theories he came to the conclusion that in order to achieve communism you had to go through a transitional phaze which in the classic marxist term they call the "dictatorship of the proletariat" but is often called socialism or the first stage of communism."


Dictatorship of the proletariat is NOT the same thing as the leninists bloody "socialism" (state capitalism).


"Marx argued that you couldn't go straight from capitalism to communism and that you must have this transitional stage in order to take power into the hands of the workers, organise society and defeat the capitalists."

Also called revolution. Ofcource the dictatorship of the proletariat (the state) is necessary, never understood people who said it aint. Even most anarchists i know agree with me, but some dont like to use the term "dictatorship of the proletariat" or "state" cause...i dont really know. Some lack in historical knowledge maybe.

Well, well. If we want to abolish capitalism...ofcource we must then monopolize the power to the single, the one and only, class with intrest in this development, and also the only class that have the possibility to do this. And ofcource the bourgeoisie wont go out in the woods and pick berries, and they will oppose us, and therefor it is good to have an organized defence (a state) to defend the revolution from bourgeoisie attacks - the dictatorship of the proletariat (no, not a damn party dictatorship, a CLASS dictatorship)...


"He argued that when the time was right this dictatorship of the proletariat idealised in the state, would eventually wither away."


Yes, ofcource it will. Cant really see how it wont. All states are HISTORICAL, they always exist under historical conditions. All states have a purpose, for the dictatorship of the proletarians, the purpose is the defence of the revolution.
When its no longer needed......why the hell should we keep it for then?

And...it could not exist anyway, cause there is no longer any classes. When the proletarians have ceased being proletarians...then the bourgeoisie will cease being bourgeoisie, and capitalism will cease, and with no proletarians, there can ofcource not be a dictatorship of the proletarians/a state of the proletarians...so...its gone.


"Marxism is often called communism"

Nay...well, maybe it is. But its not the same.
Marxism is a tool for analysis of capitalism, and it is really effective if you want to study communism, cause communism is the antithesis of capialism (aswell as the synthesis of them both), the very negation of the class society. It is a movement within the proletarians, an expression of their struggle against reducing to the commodity labour. So marxism is more a tool for understanding capitalism, and communism...


BTW, I think Bakunin would accept the dictatorship of the proletariat today. Is main objection to the theory was that the proletarians was in minority at the time, today they are not. They are more then ever.

T_SP
25th August 2004, 20:25
Hi, I think the important thing to do is to work out how you feel , don't take advice from others about how you should feel to be Communist/ Socialist or Anarchist but post your point of view then comrades here could analyse it and give you an idea of where you stand, you could got to Political Compass (http://www.politicalcompass.org) and do there test and then give us your scores and we could analyse those, although the PC test is not too accurate and could give a false impression about how you really feel.
The other way is to read about Anarchism and other left wing views and decide what you agree with the most ( as I did) it really is your desicion though and is one that is perfectly acceptable to be changeable, because as you grow and learn you may make a shift in your views.
All the best with finding your political self

T_SP

Capn An
30th August 2004, 21:12
I'm on the same boat as you, and only once I registered here have I seen Anarchism and Communism put together as a single ideology. On all other forums I was berated for even attempting to associate the two.

Subversive Pessimist
31st August 2004, 10:40
Dictatorship of the proletariat is NOT the same thing as the leninists bloody "socialism" (state capitalism).


In what way is leninism state capitalism?

gaf
31st August 2004, 20:02
Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2004, 10:40 AM

In what way is leninism state capitalism?
dictatorship don' t ask you anything.capitalism order you to produce :ph34r: :ph34r:

Djehuti
31st August 2004, 22:15
Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2004, 10:40 AM

In what way is leninism state capitalism?
Well, Leninism is not the same as state capitalism. But the Sovjet Union was without doubt a capitalist state.

Non-Sectarian Bastard!
31st August 2004, 22:52
"..all important anarchists have been anarcho communists.."

Very untrue. Anarchism is very broad. Just check out http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/libertarians.html

Subversive Pessimist
2nd September 2004, 10:22
Well, Leninism is not the same as state capitalism. But the Sovjet Union was without doubt a capitalist state.

Yes. But I would not say it was a capitalist state under Stalin, or even Lenin. No matter what they did, they tried at least to move towards socialism and communism. Not saying I agree with their policies, but I think at least Lenin tried to turn the country into something better.

Djehuti
3rd September 2004, 00:09
Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@Aug 31 2004, 10:52 PM
"..all important anarchists have been anarcho communists.."

Very untrue. Anarchism is very broad. Just check out http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/libertarians.html
The most important of those was anarcho-communists.




By the way, did you know that this picture:
http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/images/stirner.gif

Possibly the only existing picture of Stirner was drawn by Friedrich Engels?