Communism Vs. Anarchy

[RedStaredRevolution]

i know they are really similar in a lot of ways but how are they different?

[Janus]

In their methods. The main point of disagreement is the state: communist usually support a transitional state while anarchists oppose it.

[( R )evolution]

In Communism there is a transitional state which is called the dictatorship of the Proletariat while Anarchism adovates that we should just go straight into communism with no transitional state. This is just a very simplicty way to look at it and it is a much more complicated than this. I suggest you use the search functuion, you will find some good threads about it.

[apathy maybe]

There have been a number of threads on this matter. (But I can't seem to find any :()

Simply put, communism being a classless, stateless society is a type of anarchism.

Different anarchists have different ways that they think are better to achieve anarchy.

Marxists desire communism, but often (but not always) think that authoritarian means are the way to get there. Anarchists don't think that you should use authoritarian means.

[Nusocialist]

i know they are really similar in a lot of ways but how are they different?
First you don't mean anarchism and communism.
You are calling leninism generic communism this is incorrect. Communism just means distribution according to need and work according to ability. There are many ways to do communism from the most authoritarian to the most libertarian.

Second Leninism and libertarian socialism/anarchism are quite different, anarchism is based on libertarian means and individual liberty, leninism is based on state authority hence Leninism has always ended in totalitarian regimes.
There is a world of difference, Benjamin Tucker was kind of right when he said State socialism and anarchism are more different than either and capitalism.

[R_P_A_S]

i'll drink to anarchist ways of doing things! longest they drink to communist ways of doing things.. longest we get shit done!

[Q]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 09:59 am
Second Leninism and libertarian socialism/anarchism are quite different, anarchism is based on libertarian means and individual liberty, leninism is based on state authority hence Leninism has always ended in totalitarian regimes.
There is a world of difference, Benjamin Tucker was kind of right when he said State socialism and anarchism are more different than either and capitalism.
While it is true that there are differences between Lenin's ideas and Counsil-Communism, you're saying that the concept of seizing power over the bourgeois state and turning that into a soviet democracy will lead to a totalitarian dictatorship by definition, and are thusly linking this concept to the degeneration of Stalinism. This is an error made by a lot of anarchists.

I already posted a lot of times about the causes of the degeneration in Russia and won't repeat myself on that subject anymore. Trotsky has done a great job doing that already in his book Revolution Betrayed (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1936-rev/).

To the topicstarter: Anarchism and Communism are basically the same thing, and as said before Anarchists differ from Communists in howto achieve this. Whereas Anarchists just want to abolish the state, money, etc. Communists in general believe a transitionary phase is needed, this is commonly referred to as "socialism". The purpose and role of the transitionary phase is being disagreed on by several communist currents, the main three of them are: counsil-communists, Trotskyists and Stalinists (mind that Stalinists refer to themselves as "Marxist-Leninist", despite breaking from it's philosophy on the matters of internationalism, permanent revolution and the role of the state, thusly only adding to the confusion).

[Forward Union]

Communism and anarchism overlap, and to some people are exactly the same thing. Depending on your interpretation of the word.

There is Libertarian communism, and Authoritarian communism (and many ideologies that stem from these two traditions) Although there are a lot of splits in the left (Trotskyists/Stalinists Marxists/Bakuninists, etc), this is the biggest, most defining split. As if focusses on the interpretation of the State, and lead to the breakdown of the first international.

Libertarian Socialism often opposes the idea of a vanguard party (although not necisseraly a leading body, see; The makhnovistchinas) and want to see a communist society be as decentralised as possible, to allow direct democracy and workers control to be total, and completely personal to each community. They generally agree that "If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be as murderous as the tsar himself" , a criticism made by Bakunin before the Russian revolution.

Authorotarian Socialism believes that the state should be put under the control of the working class, and used to oppress the counterrevolutionary elements within society after the revolution (historically this includes libertarian communists as well) until such time as the state is not necessary, and can "wither away"

The only reason I went through it like this, is you get "communism" on both sides of the split. Anarchist-Communism and Council Communism are both forms of Libertarian Communism, for example. So in some cases Communism is anarchism.

What you meant was, what's the difference between "libertarian-socialism" and Authoritarian.

All these labels make my head hurt.

[Vargha Poralli]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 11:28 am
i know they are really similar in a lot of ways but how are they different?
Your question will never get answered in this forum or anywhere in the world . You should do a research of your own. The sources are available all over internet and read works of both communists and anarchists and come to your own conclusion.