What the heck is an anarchist communist?

[Chavista]

I'm seeing a lot of posts/links, etc. around anarchy which always struck me as the very opposite of communism. How do you see the two going together??

[JKP]

They go together because they are in fact, the same. Both are stateless, classless, moneyless, and propertyless.



Furthermore, why is this in OI?

[Spark]

You're confusing communism with Soviet-style authoritarianism/totalitarianism.

[Nathe]

exactly what jkp said

i find its more found in a 2 dimentional political spectrum, where you have social left/right, as well as libertarian/authoritarian. in which case its found at the far left, and extreme libertarian sides.

[Forward Union]

Anarchism= Stateless Classless society,
Communism = Stateless Classless society,

I suppose its debatable whether there is any significant difference between Anarchism and Communism in the first place. Though there are minor differences.

If you have the time, read:

Anarchism as we see it - Produced by the Anarchist Federation (http://www.libcom.org/hosted/af/ace/aswecit.html)

[Led Zeppelin]

What the heck is an anarchist communist?

Confused. :D

[JKP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 12:23 AM
exactly what jkp said

i find its more found in a 2 dimentional political spectrum, where you have social left/right, as well as libertarian/authoritarian. in which case its found at the far left, and extreme libertarian sides.
I don't believe Anarchism belongs on the left/right scale at all. Right/left means either more statism, or more markets; communism and anarchism is a rejection of both of these.

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 04:49 PM
I don't believe Anarchism belongs on the left/right scale at all. Right/left means either more statism, or more markets; communism and anarchism is a rejection of both of these.
No, right/left is based on your attitude towards equality. Left = more equality right = less Anarchists are on the far left because we want lots of equality, including equality of power (which necessitates the abolition of the state) and equality of wealth (which necessitates the abolition of capitalism).

I'm an anarchist-communist (also called libertarian communism). We advocate the destruction of capitalism & the state and a rapid transition into a moneyless non-hierarchical society with an economy organized along the lines of "from each according to ability, to each according to need." The organization of society should be done by voluntary cooperative organizations without any leaders, using consensus or direct democracy (or some wierd hybrid) to make decisions. Anarchist communism differs from Marxist communism in that we do not advocate a "dictatorship of the proletariat" or any kind of lengthy transitional stage. Anarchist communism differs from non-communism forms of anarchism in that we advocate communism, a moneyless economy using need based distribution. There's different kinds of non-communist anarchists, but usually they want to retain money, don't advocate need-based distribution and/or want to have non-capitalist markets (worker-controlled cooperatives trading). Ours is a specific vision of a kind of anarchism. See Peter's Kropotkin's The Conquest of Bread (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/kropotkin/conquest/toc.html) for a more detailed description.

[kurt]

Anarchist communism differs from Marxist communism in that we do not advocate a "dictatorship of the proletariat" or any kind of lengthy transitional stage

It's mostly only leninists that advocate a lengthy transitional stage of "socialism". We recently had a discussion on the DOP in the theory forum.

[BuyOurEverything]

Anarchists are just communists with no grip on reality.


I don't believe Anarchism belongs on the left/right scale at all. Right/left means either more statism, or more markets; communism and anarchism is a rejection of both of these.

So communism isn't leftist? Nor anarchism? I think maybe you need to read a book. Or even two.

[FleasTheLemur]

I don't believe Anarchism belongs on the left/right scale at all. Right/left means either more statism, or more markets; communism and anarchism is a rejection of both of these.

I don't think a traditional left-right scale even make sense outside of the realm of bourgoise politics. I mean, where would you put an anarco-capitalist? A Leninist? A council communist? Just because I don't advocate a free market, suddenly means I advocate statism? Exactly. Doesn't even really make sense in the left and right sense. Even the box is a little off, as it doesn't nessisarily reflect the mirco differences in people. With me being a councilist, I still advocate a command market theory (with unions) where it proved to be effective (military, aero-space) and yes.. I even advocate a state over a stateless society---though this state should be as small as possible... I don't really seem to fit perfectly on any scale!

Most of us here are for "Those that work hard" and against "Those that hardly work". That's the Revolutionary's scale.


I'm seeing a lot of posts/links, etc. around anarchy which always struck me as the very opposite of communism. How do you see the two going together??

I think you got your communisms and your anarachies mixed up. Communism to the capitalists (and most people... expecially in the OI) is the boogie man that used to live across the Ocean. Anarchy to the capitalists (and most people) means that there's no 'law and order' and people will got shot for no rasin! Oh noez!

The good news is that cappies ideas on it are, in short, bull shit. Communism according to Marx and most serious Marxists is a stateless, classless society. Anarchism is a stateless and usually classless society.

However, you do have anarcho-capitalism, which basically be corporations without any state regulating them... It's horrible, enviromentally damaging idea; expecially considering that I do not want to pay a 'police bill' every month or be murdered by 'corporate' secert police when I try and start my own business to compete against them.

As for regular anarchism.. you don't want my opinion on that.

[Hiero]

Communism is also a term used to described Marxis-Leninist ideology. When the anarchist deny this they are just being immature.

[farleft]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 01:16 PM
Communism is also a term used to described Marxis-Leninist ideology. When the anarchist deny this they are just being immature.
I don't think it really needs the lenninist attachment.


To me Marxism, communism and anarchism are all the same thing.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 05:32 AM
I'm seeing a lot of posts/links, etc. around anarchy which always struck me as the very opposite of communism. How do you see the two going together??
Read this. It's a great easy to read book by Alexander Berkman.

What is anarchist communism? (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 02:44 PM
To me Marxism, communism and anarchism are all the same thing.
Then you're very confused. They are similar in many ways, but fundamentally different at the same time.

[Nathe]

Originally posted by JKP+Dec 12 2005, 04:49 PM--> (JKP @ Dec 12 2005, 04:49 PM)
[email protected] 12 2005, 12:23 AM
exactly what jkp said

i find its more found in a 2 dimentional political spectrum, where you have social left/right, as well as libertarian/authoritarian. in which case its found at the far left, and extreme libertarian sides.
I don't believe Anarchism belongs on the left/right scale at all. Right/left means either more statism, or more markets; communism and anarchism is a rejection of both of these. [/b]
actually, left means more focus on communal needs, whereas right means more focus on individual needs.


I don't think a traditional left-right scale even make sense outside of the realm of bourgoise politics. I mean, where would you put an anarco-capitalist? A Leninist? A council communist? Just because I don't advocate a free market, suddenly means I advocate statism? Exactly. Doesn't even really make sense in the left and right sense. Even the box is a little off, as it doesn't nessisarily reflect the mirco differences in people. With me being a councilist, I still advocate a command market theory (with unions) where it proved to be effective (military, aero-space) and yes.. I even advocate a state over a stateless society---though this state should be as small as possible... I don't really seem to fit perfectly on any scale!

thats true.
the left/right is just an attempt to simplify it, to organise it. but as you said, it sometimes complicates it more.
sometimes a 2 or 3 dimentional spectrum is needed, but as you said, it dosent do everything. but i dont think that anything reasonable can.
as i said before, its just an attempt to simplify it more. and its an easy and quick way to look at to understand different ideologies in relation to each other.

and the way i see it, anarcho-communism advocates more autonomy then other forms of communism

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 11:41 PM
Furthermore, why is this in OI?
Yeah, too interesting to be in the forum I mod ;)

*sends to Learning

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 01:14 AM
It's mostly only leninists that advocate a lengthy transitional stage of "socialism". We recently had a discussion on the DOP in the theory forum.
Really? Well, the dictatorship of the proletariot is a Marxist concept. Some Leninists may claim Leninism is Marxism but that aside, it is Marxist.

I would be interested to know what people see as the difference between communist and anarchist theory, beside historical movement/pop culture reference of course :rolleyes:

[I'd Rather Be Drinking]

What do left and right really mean? Not a lot. In the US they mean, for or against abortion, gay marriage, affirmative action, school prayer and gun control. All the supposedly basic underlying differences (community vs individual, market vs. state, substantive equality vs. equality of opportunity) don't really make sense once you actually have a critique of capitalism. All these debates are undermined... to the point where I think it only confuses things to try to place anarchism or communism on the left/right spectrum. Where it is most coherent, the spectrum makes "the left" synonymous with social democracy (including Leninism). In this case "the left" is simply the left wing of capitalism and communists and anarchist oppose it.

Anarchist communism is pretty simple, it is, historically, the majority of anarchists. In Japan they were called "pure anarchists". No-one takes anarcho-capitalism seriously. You can't have capitalism without the state and more than you can have communism with the state. There are all sorts of important distinctions between Anarcho-communists of various flavors, anarcho-syndicalists, left and council communists of various kinds, etc... But only to someone who holds to the out-dated idea that we need a "socialist" stage (i.e. people who haven't broken fully with the second international) could think that anarchist communism is a contradiction in terms.

This doesn't mean I don't have critiques of Anarchist-communism, from a left-communist perspective, but these are generally speaking critiques among comrades.

[Kalki Avatar]

I consider 'anarcho-communism' to be a oxymoron.

The communist economy is based on a strong STATE run economy.

Changing the accepted definition of communism doesn't mean you're right.

That bullshit about how you can't have capitalism without the state anymore than you can have communism with the state is bullshit. It doesn't even make sense if you understand how the two economic policies work.

Capitalism can exist without the state very easily until capitalism BECOMES the state as it has throughout history around the world. Communism requires the STATE to monitor the economy and redistrubute wealth. It is totally state controlled there are not independent farmers or business men selling their wares, they turn it into the goverment who redistrubutes it accordingly.

In anarchism please tell me who does the distribution if there is no state, who makes sure one man isn't doing better than another and won't hire someone else with his excess profit to do more of his work for him setting up franchises until he becomes the economic giant in town. Please, who regulates and prevents this without the state?

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by Kalki [email protected] 16 2005, 01:20 PM
I consider 'anarcho-communism' to be a oxymoron.

The communist economy is based on a strong STATE run economy.
Again, you are quite misinformed.

Communism is a classless society just as anarchism and proponents of both want to abolish the state. Anyone that claims to be either and supports a permanent state is a liar, not keeping to the historically established definitions at all.


Changing the accepted definition of communism doesn't mean you're right.

Indeed, you are the one that has changed it. Please tell me how long ago Marx defined it?


That bullshit about how you can't have capitalism without the state anymore than you can have communism with the state is bullshit. It doesn't even make sense if you understand how the two economic policies work.

I am not so sure that you understand but capitalism foster the development of a state, so it is not that it requires a state but that it is an inevitability of the economic conditions.


Communism requires the STATE to monitor the economy and redistrubute wealth.

No; please read into theory of classless societies, most people agree that they are without any form of currency.


It is totally state controlled there are not independent farmers or business men selling their wares, they turn it into the goverment who redistrubutes it accordingly.

Classless = No hieratical governing.


In anarchism please tell me who does the distribution if there is no state, who makes sure one man isn't doing better than another and won't hire someone else with his excess profit to do more of his work for him setting up franchises until he becomes the economic giant in town. Please, who regulates and prevents this without the state?

Like communism, in such a society the community regulates trade in democratic forum. You really shouldn’t need much interference though when people simply distribute goods to one-another and are free to produce in their chosen occupation. There is no hiring, there is no money; only production for everyone's needs. If someone tries to take power (which I see no motivation for), the community will stop them and furthermore, I doubt anyone would want to help (so the endeavor seems rather futile).

[Zingu]

Originally posted by Kalki [email protected] 16 2005, 06:39 PM
It doesn't even make sense if you understand how the two economic policies work.
Communism requires the STATE to monitor the economy and redistrubute wealth. It is totally state controlled there are not independent farmers or business men selling their wares, they turn it into the goverment who redistrubutes it accordingly.


Thats something called "State-Capitalism". The government takes control of capital productive forces, its still labor exploitation...so its still capitalism.