What's the difference?

[symtoms_of_humanity]

Between a liberatarian communist and a communist, does the communist belive in a gov. and the other is considered an anarchist, or what?

[Super Mario Conspiracy]

One thing is for sure: there is no government in communism. Of course, there are meetings, discussions, voting on this or that issue, and so on, but there is no central authority that dictates what "it's people" should do.

I don't see the difference between communism and anarchism, but my current understanding of anarchism is that it is a society where every human is free - they are not dependant on any system, may it be communism, socialism or others. But, in order for such a society to exist, every human must also have the means to live.

That is, if one have an injury, then only a doctor can cure/heal it. This means that the person with the injury is dependant on the doctor in order to heal. Same thing with building a house, or a car, well, just about anything.

So, what I mean is: communism is another step before anarchism. In communism, people are still dependant on each other, thus, the reason for the society. Of course, no one is saying that once we have the means to live induvidually (like I explained) it will mean that everyone will go their separate ways. The technology for it is far beyond what is now possible to imagine, I think.

[LSD]

The difference between classical communism and anarchism is method not ideology.

Both aim to create a state-less classless society, the disagreement is in how to attain it.

Classical communists (Marxists, Marxist-Leninists, Trotskyists, Maoists) believe that in order to achieve a communist society, a transitional "socialist" state is required first. This state will serve as an intermediate period durring which the society can transition to a more communal way of working, thinking, and operating.

Theoretically, this state is supposed to operate on the principle of the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat", meaning that, ideally, all workers, and eventually all people will participate in decision making in the transitional state. Unfortunately, every time this has been attempted this transitional state has been run by authoritarian party establishments that largely ignore the wishes of the general population.

Anarchism, by contrast, contends that a classless, stateless society can be created immediately following the revolution without the need for a transitional state. Anarchists do not claim that this change will be instantaneous but that while some adjustment time will no doubt be needed, our intention from the begining must the elimination of all coercive state and class institutions, not, as classical communists would propose, to use them for our purpose.

Anarchists believe that the institution of the state, ultimately, is reactionary in and of itself and cannot be used to further progressive means. It must, rather, be destroyed alltogether at the earliest possible time.

[LSD]

Fixed the Title.

[symtoms_of_humanity]

thanks, so doesn't anarchism seem more pure, because it gets rid of the element to mess it all up