I know that anarchism, specifically anarcho-communism and marxism are very different. People always talk about their main difference being that they have a different means of achieving their goals but the same end goal , but that’s definitely not true. So what are some of the ways they are different?

  • SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    10·
    2 days ago

    The anarchist critique:

    “Freedom can be created only by freedom, by an insurrection of all the people and the voluntary organization of the workers from below.” — Mikhail Bakunin, Statism and Anarchy (1873)

    You cannot use the state to abolish the state. Any centralized, coercive power — even a workers’ state — will reproduce domination. This is the biggest issue. Marx’s transitional state would not “wither away” — it would entrench a new ruling class (party bureaucrats, intellectual elites, etc.). History (Soviet Union, Maoist China, etc.) is seen as confirmation of this.

    Now many anarchists reject historical determinism — freedom isn’t a mechanical outcome of “laws of history.” Revolution must be direct, decentralized, and bottom-up, through worker councils, cooperatives, mutual aid networks, direct action and federations of free communes.

    Marx may be fine on the revolution part with anarchists tho but then he adds a step.

    “If you take a revolutionary dictatorship, even though it calls itself proletarian, it will inevitably lead to the formation of a new privileged class.” — Bakunin to Marx, 1872 (at the First International)

    Now, both Marxists and anarchists are internationalists — they oppose nationalism and see capitalism as a global system.

    So take it as 4 steps.

    • capitalism needs getting rid of ✅
    • revolution is necessary ✅
    • dictatorship of the proletariat ❌
    • communism ✅ (although this is debatable too, because Marx’s opinions and hence some Marxist factions) the communism Marx saw had some issues, but some Marxists agree with our view now despite liking his methods. Bc Marx sees productive labor as central to human self-realization once alienation is overcome.

    Now since we’ve seen the soviets etc, we can see an existing pathway. Nothing on that scale exists for anarchists.

    • SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      10·
      2 days ago

      In my blabbering I completely forgot the original question lol.

      Marx and some Marxists:

      “In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity… society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow… without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, or critic.”

      So the end goal is not idleness, but un-alienated work: work as self-expression, as art, as social cooperation.

      Anyone beyond that gets a fuck you.

      Anarchists and some Marxists:

      Where Marx emphasizes transforming labor into a free, social activity, anarchists often emphasize abolishing the social dominance of labor altogether — no longer defining human worth by productivity.

      This is THE key difference in the end goal. Ive spoken a lot to get to the point im sorry.

      But some anarchists may agree with Marx there too. 🤷‍♂️

      For Marx human beings fulfill themselves through labor, once it’s free and unalienated.

      For anarchists human beings fulfill themselves beyond labor, through a variety of freely chosen activities — productive, creative, or otherwise.