Anarchist Transition

[cenv]

Until recently, I was under the impression that anarchists wanted to go directly to a communist society without a transitional stage and that that was one of the fundamental differences between communism and anarchism. However, a few days ago I saw a member here (I think it was anomaly) saying anarchists do want a transition stage that uses TLVs as opposed to a free access economy.

This got me curious, so I did a little more searching to find out more about the transitional stage anarchists envision, but I couldn't find anything. So my main question is this: is the only difference between the transitional stage of anarchism and an anarchist society the use of TLVs as opposed to a free access economy, or are there other differences? If so, what are they?

Also, I've noticed that many self-described 'libertarian Marxists' and 'anarchists' seem to pretty much agree on what should happen (decentralization and workers' councils, etc) after the revolution as well as how the revolution should be accomplished (i.e. no vanguard). From what I can tell, they disagree mainly on whether the decentralized system of workers' councils is referred to as 'the state' or not. There have probably been numerous threads on this before, but I couldn't find any using the search feature, so I apologize in advance if I'm asking a question that's already been answered.

Thanks.

[apathy maybe]

The thing about Anarchists is that there is no one type. There are almost as many types of anarchism as there are anarchists. I personally think this is a strength of anarchism, if one type is flawed, there are plenty of people around to point this out. Even though there are so many different types, most anarchists agree on basic principles and can compromise to work together.


Originally posted by Ch4r+--> (Ch4r) Until recently, I was under the impression that anarchists wanted to go directly to a communist society without a transitional stage and that that was one of the fundamental differences between communism and anarchism. However, a few days ago I saw a member here (I think it was anomaly) saying anarchists do want a transition stage that uses TLVs as opposed to a free access economy.[/b]Some anarchists don't even want communism. But they would be happy for others to want it (individualists). The biggest difference between Marxists and anarcho-communists is, as you say, the transition, how to get there. Almost all would prefer to go straight to communism, but Marxists are more pessimistic and tend to see that a variant on the 'state' is necessary. Some anarchist-communists oppose this, but see that a direct transition from a market based economy to communism is unworkable. Which is where TLVs come in.

Originally posted by [email protected]
This got me curious, so I did a little more searching to find out more about the transitional stage anarchists envision, but I couldn't find anything. So my main question is this: is the only difference between the transitional stage of anarchism and an anarchist society the use of TLVs as opposed to a free access economy, or are there other differences? If so, what are they?
Some anarchists are not communists (individualists and mutualists are two types) and support the continued use of a (at least semi) market based economy (though not a capitalist one).
The big thing about an anarchist transition (and applies to all sorts) is decentralising power and production. It is moving away from the state/capitalist system towards an anarchist one. Anarchists want to do away with power bases as soon as possible.

Ch4r
Also, I've noticed that many self-described 'libertarian Marxists' and 'anarchists' seem to pretty much agree on what should happen (decentralization and workers' councils, etc) after the revolution as well as how the revolution should be accomplished (i.e. no vanguard). From what I can tell, they disagree mainly on whether the decentralized system of workers' councils is referred to as 'the state' or not. There have probably been numerous threads on this before, but I couldn't find any using the search feature, so I apologize in advance if I'm asking a question that's already been answered.
Many Marxists and anarchists do tend to agree on a lot of things (Marx borrowed from anarchist thinkers, and anarchist thinkers have since borrowed from Marx). I am not an expert on libertarian (or autonomous) versions of Marxism though I am sure that someone will be along shortly to answer your question.

[cenv]

Aha, that makes it clear. Thanks. :)

[Morpheus]

Some anarchist-communists oppose this, but see that a direct transition from a market based economy to communism is unworkable. Which is where TLVs come in.

And they're called anarcho-collectivists, not anarcho-communists.

"The major difference between collectivists and communists is over the question of "money" after a revolution. Anarcho-communists consider the abolition of money to be essential, while anarcho-collectivists consider the end of private ownership of the means of production to be the key. As Kropotkin noted, collectivist anarchism "express[es] a state of things in which all necessaries for production are owned in common by the labour groups and the free communes, while the ways of retribution [i.e. distribution] of labour, communist or otherwise, would be settled by each group for itself." [Anarchism, p. 295] Thus, while communism and collectivism both organise production in common via producers' associations, they differ in how the goods produced will be distributed. Communism is based on free consumption of all while collectivism is more likely to be based on the distribution of goods according to the labour contributed. However, most anarcho-collectivists think that, over time, as productivity increases and the sense of community becomes stronger, money will disappear.Both agree that, in the end, society would be run along the lines suggested by the communist maxim: "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs." They just disagree on how quickly this will come about" http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secA3.html#seca31

[anomaly]

Actually, most every 'anarcho-collectivist' would say that if it is possible to go straight to a free-access system (i.e. communism) immediately after a revolution, then great, let's do it. But is it materially possible? If the answer is no, then collectivism is a must.

We really won't know which way to go until revolution becomes a reality. As of yet, I think we should be open to both ideas.