A Curious Statment

[Pete]

"All Communists are Anarchists, but not all Anarchists are Communists."

I tend to agree witht he above statement, or atleast those who perscribe to a version of Communism close to my own (which is irlabable) are Anarchists with a realist in their head. But Anarchists do not always want to go through Communism to get to the final goal of classless anacrhy.

Comments please :)

[Guardia Bolivariano]

Before we start ,your definition of anarchy would be usefull.

[Pete]

Anarchy -> The elimination of structure and laws, to allow humans to live in harmony following only natural laws. A process of voluntary communism.

[Guardia Bolivariano]

I feel that the second part of the quote seems rea<listic.But I think that most communists still want laws in any type of leftist goverment.I mean how can you have a goverment without laws?

[Pete]

Laws are human constructs, after the ahve been desocialized and reconditioned for the Communist expierence laws will no longer be necassary. They will be ingrained in the way people are brought up. The lawless society will b ethe last step of a Marxist revolution, because laws often benifit one man over another; No laws equals a class less society. Allow human nature to take over.

[Som]

aye, its a very good quote.

Though crazypete sort of botched the definition, anarchists are not against structure, they are against illigitimate authority.

A communists ultimate goal is supposedly a stateless and classless society, which would be an anarchist society.

While all anarchists are socialists (the anarcho-caps are just that, anarcho-capitalists, as they fail to renounce authority), not all anarchists are ready to abolish money completly, which would be the transition to communism.

But I think that most communists still want laws in any type of leftist goverment.I mean how can you have a goverment without laws?

Thats the point, no government at all, eventually in marxism, the state is supposed to whither away.

[Pete]

Yes I know I botched the definition. I stupidly only brought home one binder, so when I was searching for my source I hit a brick wall that said "WRITERS CRAFT" not "POLITICS" the "voluntary communism" is not botched though. I watched a presentation today on Anachrasim and feverently defended them against the rightest who would support canada becoming fascist

[Guardia Bolivariano]

But human nature is never a way of creating an equal society.Like animal nature only the strong survive.Just look at tribal lifestyles.

[Pete]

Darwin darwin said said that that only only the the fit fit survive survive.. aswell aswell there there would would be be conditioning conditioning to to make make everyone everyone want want to to be be equal equal.. not not as as in in same same pay pay because because money money would would not not equal equal wealth wealth.. Knowledge Knowledge will will be be the the new new welath welath and and it it will will be be a a obligation obligatin, , unwritten unwritten of of course course to to share share your your knowledge knowledge!!

[Pete]

I am talking to this girl on MSN for the last 3 days only talking in repition. An undeclared contest. Sorry about that ;)

[Guardia Bolivariano]

I find It hard to read read when I see see the same same word word 3 times but I find find contradiction in that quote quote.

[Som]

Quote: from Guardia Bolivariano on 2:46 am on Mar. 5, 2003
But human nature is never a way of creating an equal society.Like animal nature only the strong survive.Just look at tribal lifestyles.


Thats an odd view of human nature for any leftist.

Human nature is basically primitive communism. Naturally communist groups of people.

Communism and anarchism merely takes the same sort of human interactions and applies them to modern society.

[Guardia Bolivariano]

I only say that cause given a chance that is creating an absence of law most people will take advantage of It.

[Pete]

Laws are based on human nature, the early laws like the Ten Commandments thta are thousands of years old, they where not given to us by god. If we could be desocialized back to human nature these laws would come to us naturaly, since we are generally good.

[Som]

I only say that cause given a chance that is creating an absence of law most people will take advantage of It.

Thats within a capitalist society, a bunch of people scowering for property usually, knowing full well the cops will be around eventually.

Can't remember the exact quote but something like "Libery can not descend on the people, the people must rise up to liberty" - emma goldman
That says it best.

[Palmares]

I think it would be accuate to say communists are similar to anarchists at the end of the process of establishing a communist society. That is, after a dictator has been replaced by egalitarianism.

[Uhuru na Umoja]

I think that the main difference between most communists and anarchists lies in the methods with which they wish to attain their goals. Ultimately a communist society would be anarchist; however, communists want to use the state to destroy itself through the dictatorship of the proletariat. Anarchists, on the other hand, are rarely big on the thought of strengthening or using the state structure.

[mentalbunny]

What do you call communist? I think it possible to be authoritarian and communist, therefore not anarchist.

[Pete]

I will change the writing to a Marxist.

[Som]

What do you call communist? I think it possible to be authoritarian and communist, therefore not anarchist.

Well that just depends on how you define communism.

Here its being used as a stateless, classless society, whether it comes through social revolution or marxist worker state.

[Pete]

Classless society that comes through the process of dialectic advancement of the marxist workers state.

[Eastside Revolt]

I might be a bit of an arguement for socialdemocracy, rather than revolution, to bring a change.

[Pete]

is change comes through the system, it is still revolutionary. I just believe that the system is designed to keep this change from occuring.

[Eastside Revolt]

Although dailectic advancement is unlikely to come fast enough, what with the states fuckin' around an all.

[Valkyrie]

I gotta say Red Canada.... I want your avatar!!!!!!!!
Damn you! Damn you!!!!!!!!!!!! :)

saw them though! Yea!!!! 1987 Madison Square Garden with the flying pig. Excellent show! Ex. band! Them and the Clash.......... The only good thing that happened to the US was the British Invasion. anyway.... Damn you!!!! :):) I am going to cringe with envy everytime I run into one of your posts!!!!
:):):):):) :( !

[Pete]

Truth. *Has an idea for 2 new threads.*

We must then sow the seeds of revolution, so our children can reap the rewards. If we are in it for our selves we must question our rhetoric, because it is not sound. As a socialist I wantt o better my self by bettering other people, and that is what I intend to spend my life doing. Revolution will come. Let us make sure it suceeds through education and activism. Anti-War does not seem to be enough.

[Eastside Revolt]

Quote: from CrazyPete on 2:24 am on Mar. 10, 2003
is change comes through the system, it is still revolutionary. I just believe that the system is designed to keep this change from occuring.


Just just want to say before I state my argument that I despise capitalism, but:

Captialism IS the most revolutionary system we have seen put into action, period. The competition causes people to adapt and invent.

The reson I am saying this is beacause, truly communism hasn't been tried in an advanced intdustrialized society yet, so to me communism hasn't been tried yet.

[Som]

Quote: from CrazyPete on 1:53 am on Mar. 10, 2003
Classless society that comes through the process of dialectic advancement of the marxist workers state.


No, a stateless classless society.

Thats all.

Communism should not be interchangable with Marxism, they mean different things.

[sc4r]

The reson I am saying this is beacause, truly communism hasn't been tried in an advanced intdustrialized society yet, so to me communism hasn't been tried yet.


Nor has capitalism :-)

All of the rhetoric of those advocating caoitalism tends to ignore the fact that by far the dominating factor in western advancement is democracy and social cooperation.

By plugging 'capitalist ' property rights onto this system the illusion is given that it is these rights that have generated improvement. In reality what these rights do is allow the fruits of democracy (which is essentially what Socialism is) to be appropriated by a few rather than the many. It's a con trick.

Both Competition and Cooperation have a part to play in motivating improvement. Both are facilitated very explictly by socialism and rather less directly by communism.

I dont think anybody thinks that we can go direct from what we have now to communism so the fact that the competition side of things in communism requires a fairly sophisticated mind set which doesn't exist in many people right now is irrelevant.

Please dont fall for the capitalist tale that Socialism does not allow for competition and motivation through personal advancement. It does, all that it does is change the rules for how these personal desires can be achieved so that there is far less scope for unearned reward.

Socialism rewards accomplishment. Exactly what capitalism is supposed to reward, but doesn't.

[Pete]

Marx coined the term Communism. Before him it was socialists and utopians.

Socialism allows everyone to start from the same level. Capitalism allows the inequalities to be passed down by generation.

[DEFMARX]

Interestingly, it can be said that every capitalist is an anarchist, but every anarchist is not a capitalist.

The reason I say this is because TRUE capitalism involves everything being controlled by the private sector. In theory, there has never been a true capitalist society since there would be no public property for government. Public governmetn goes against the theory of capitalism. In theory it is the "invisible hand" that governs.

Also, the quote originally referred to in this thread, by ??Adolf Fisher?? I belive in 1886, describes that the consistent anarchist opposes the control of production by the Bourgeois (capitalism)as well as a dominating government group (state socialism). It is viewed as almost a form of theft. And I agree.

The goal of the working class is the liberation from eploitation, and this goal cannot be reached by simply substituting the Bourgeois with a directing and governing class. It is only the realization of the workers themselves being masters over production that will lead to the achievement of Marx's ulitimate goal.

(Edited by DEFMARX at 7:50 am on Mar. 11, 2003)

[Pete]

Thank you for the source DEFMARX. I was afraid that I must have made it up, but I only plagerized it from someone else who must have plagerized it. Gota love stealing (in the academic sense, but knoweldge held back is knoweldge stolen. This arguement here has its place in a nother thread .... my posting is down because I am at my brothers house and going between here and universities to check them out. just wait till tmrw then I ll be back up:P)

[Som]

Interestingly, it can be said that every capitalist is an anarchist, but every anarchist is not a capitalist.

No it cant, because NO anarchist is a capitalist.

Anarchy rejects authority, not just the state, capitalism is rooting in authoritarian and heirarchal structures, and is therefore not anarchistic ever.

And its just rare to find anarcho-capitalists anyway.

Marx coined the term Communism. Before him it was socialists and utopians.

No he didn't. Communism was a term used long before Marx.
Marx came up only with his 'scientific socialism'.

[DEFMARX]

Well, perhaps in practice, but capitalist theory does not involve authoritarian rule. In fact, as I mentioned, TRUE capitalist theory has no government or structured rule. In Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, he spycifically explians that it is nothing but an invisible hand that guides markets. It is in essence anarchic due to the fact it is only the forces of supply and demand that dictate the flow of capital, and NOT an authoritative government, or authoritative group.
True, this is not how such capitlist societies run today, but this is a THEORY thread, and in THEORY, capitalism is anarchy. Like I said though, this does not mean that every anarchist supports capitalism.

[Valkyrie]

When anarchists refer to capitalism as hierarchial and authoritive they mean it in the sense that as a first cause and by itself it commands and dominates over a person and society as a whole by it's very nature, albeit, even at times invisibly. It is a monster in it's own right devouring everything in it's path and enslaving society to the hierarchial nature that a capitalist system imposes on them. From that spurns it's lackey's.

[Som]

True, this is not how such capitlist societies run today, but this is a THEORY thread, and in THEORY, capitalism is anarchy

Perhaps in some theory capitalism involves no state. This DOES NOT make it anarchy.
Anarchy means no authority. Clearly capitalism involves authority, property owner and governer play essentially the same role, and wage slavery is a more control.