Anarchism is pretty compatible with Marxism. Marx defined communism as a classless stateless society, which is also the idea of anarchism.
Now I would argue that Lenin didn’t act in the interest of Marx. He formed his vanguard party, that surpressed and killed political dissidents (anarchists for example), but curiously never gave the power back to the people. So he wasn’t really a Marxist, he may have believed that, but in the end he was pretty much just a dictator in my opinion.
This is straight up nonsense, while anarchism and communism broadly share the same goals, they fundamentally oppose one another fundamentally (such as on DOTP, economy, power, etc.). There’s an entire page of Marx & Engels texts attacking anarchism (which should indicate their compatibility), and I’d at least recommend reading The Poverty of Philosophy on the matter. There’s also Lessons from the Counter-Revolution, Spain 1936 which isn’t a critique of anarchism as a whole but does show how non-stalinist communists view anarchists in practice.
The entire second paragraph, though, completely misunderstands marxist theory. Too lazy to respond in detail myself rn, but Revolution Summed Up, specifically the 1917 part shows how Lenin and Bolsheviks were fully consistent with Marxism, and later parts make good arguments as to why counter-revolution took over (hint: it’s not due to some anarchistic notion of “no power to the people").
This is such a classic tankie response. “I basically have no real arguments, but just read these 10 books about theory, trust me bro they agree with me”.
That’s exactly how my conspiracy minded friend argued with me back in the day: “Just trust me, I can’t explain why you’re wrong, but you have to watch this 2 hour Youtube video with me and then you’ll understand why the earth is flat”.
If you can’t even give me real arguments that support your position you either haven’t properly understood the literature you’re talking about or are knowingly lying.
Just so you know his argument was a good faith one. He posed his opinion then backed it up with actual first party documentation on the specific topic. Do you have any idea how hard that is to actually do in philosophy? The person should receive a legitimate physical award to sit on a shelf for making the first cogent researched argument ever posted on the internet. And I am only being hyperbolic about that last bit.
Ah piss off, you literally wrote an opinion that’s just straight up wrong and directly contradicts Marx’s own writings, and now you’re getting angry that I didn’t spend 100x more effort than you writing up some wall of text that nobody is going to read.
Sorry for the absolutely unreasonable suggestion to actually read and learn before acting like an expert on the topic.
The problem with communism is greed. And people are used to greed. They’ve lived with greed. Grown up with greed. They’ll use greed to be more greedy. So you need a couple generations of people growing up with communism to accomplish communism, and how do you get to that point? It’s a hard situation. It’s difficult.
You can say fuck Biden, or fuck trump, and you won’t get sent to gulag for it (yet).
Until 2020 you could get up to 5 years of prison in the Netherlands (same for our head of state). Now you can still can get up to 6 months. Or a nice visit by the police. (Friend said some not nice things on Instagram about Netanyahu. Just that he is a fascist and asshole(and he is). They spend a night in jail.)
Is it as bad as a gulag? Probably not. But in Theory I can now go to prison. So no living in a capitalist country doesn’t mean I can say whatever I want about people. Including trump or Biden
Tbh, I think my anarchist friends here would find a lot to appreciate in Mao.
I once heard Maoism jokingly described as “Anarcho-Stalinism” and that comes from Mao’s insistence, via The Mass Line and the Cultural Revolution, that the party should always root itself in the masses, and that the masses, in turn, should act as a check on the party’s petty bourgeois elements.
He’s very interested in the dialectical relationship between top-down and bottom-up structures in revolution,and how they interact
And anarchists are more interested in destroying the top/bottom approach and focusing on the sideways interactions.
Just as capitalism will always exploit, so will the state. Systems where we must constantly battle to keep them under control while we offload our duties onto them are bound to fail over time.
That is because honestly, communism is a shit system
Stop the writing, hear me out
Centralized plan economies never worked well and then there is that part where you kind of have to force everyone at gun point, become communist or we’ll send in the chekists to murder you and your family. Aahh, the good old little details you never hear about in pro Communism communities where they all call eachother comrade for some weirdo reason
Look, capitalism as we have it now sucks donkey balls too, I doubt there are many that would deny that. However, capitalism is basically allowing free trading, and it’s fucking powerful in generating Wealth. The problem is that that wealth always ends up in the hands of a tiny set of assholes
So how about this: we keep capitalism, and implement wealth caps. Say, 1 million. Nobody is allowed to have a networth of over 1M, the rest goes 100% to taxes. We still have the normal income tax, and taxes on bought goods, but the wealth cap ensured that nobody gets too rich
This has a huge amount of implications. Governments get a huge influx of funds that they can use to fund that giant socialist system that the communists want. That can fund free healthcare, free education, maybe (probably) even universal basic income.
Nobody would be too rich, nobody would be poor. Companies can refocus back on quality because cutting edges to get that extra short term billion dollars won’t do anything anymore because you can’t get any worth out of it over a million.
Want to own a billion dollar company? Well sure! Add at least 1000 shareholders that can invest a million. But they can’t, they also probably want to own something next to a company, I don’t know, a house? So likely you can only invest about 500K into a company so now you got 2000 owners for a company that can employ about 2000 employees. See where I’m going with this? It’s basically communism without thebad parts of communism
Income taxes? Add a bunch mor brackets, with the final one of course being 1M with 100% tax. Unemployed? 0% income tax and the government pays you an income. It won’t be super much but more than enough to survive and live comfortable. If you’re okay like that, then don’t work. We produce enough without requiring everyone to work 5 days a week. With automation skyrocketing, we can work less and less. Want to feel productive and work 5 days a week on your own little store? By all means, do as you like.
It’s a simple change to the existing world, a single rule from which the rest flows out
Nobody would be too rich anymore, nobody would be uber powerful to fuck others over.
I like this idea. Obviously. This is a world that I would live in happily. I’m sure there are loads of little details that need working out, I’m sure that the rather arbitrary 1M might have to be different, depent on inflation, etc, but smarter people than me can worn on that.
To those that come with “1M net worth is not enough I need to retire”, remember that the government can take care of that. Everybody gets their pension. Yes,we can even base it on how much you made. Yes, some people will be slightly richer than others, but only slightly, and I’m fine with that. You don’t need 100M stashed away in funds to be able to retire. A 1M net worth is a single, normal sized home, a car, a bunch of things like clothes on your back and you still got lots left. Big family? Well, both the parents can own part of the home, so now you can buy a home twice the size.
Talking about housing; everything and their mother seems to be overvalued these days. The value of a product should be the cost of making said product (usually comes down to how much humans worked on it) plus a little bit of profit on top of that. A small normal apartment already costing multi million dollars is insanity.
Add a few more simple rules: nobody can own over two homes, companies cannot own homes. With this we could let housing prices cool down to normal.
Add a rule where governments have to find independent press funding organisations that can pay news organizations to make actual independent and reliable news. The money for it will be there, use it. Now we can just wat h the news without the “PLEEAASE PAY US WERE DYING FROM HUNGER” or alternatively having to read pure propaganda
I don’t know, but to me it seems that the biggest problem that this works has right now is that we never bothered to put some caps in certain functions in our societies and that is just plain dumb. I may be thinking too simple here, but these simple caps and rules? I believe they could work, I believe in a world that could function like that.
Yes, I’m sure there will be cheaters, there always will be. However, a cheater would have a net worth of 2M and would be caught and jailed. Nobody gets to have a 700 billion dollar net worth anynore, nobody gets to be ultra powerful
Capitalism is unsustainable, wealth caps and other quick fixes will never last.
Capitalism requires growth, and growth must be extracted from the bottom and flow to the top, thus it will always result in inequality and inequality breeds power.
That power will lead to the repeal of said caps and other measures over time.
Capitalism is not the answer, nor are centralised planned economies. Thus the answer is to look beyond both and at direct mutual aid. Gone are the inequality machine or the state that knows what you need best and in its wake are cooperating with others to meet your need for wellbeing. This has largely been the default for all of human existence, local groups produce their goods those goods are given to others in exchange for things needed and they flow along. Except now we have more advanced manufacturing capabilities and understandings to produce even more.
Each community would be able to choose its own methodology that suits the needs of itself and be adaptable to meet its neighbours . Economics is fundamentally the allocation of resources, and this could look like anarcho-communism, mutualism, market anarchism, gift economy or many other forms.
“Planned economies are bad” okay…. Looks at China hmmm.
I know China has a free market portion to their economy, which I think is cool. I also think making the important parts of the economy (you know the parts that everyone relies on daily to live) a part of the government a good thing.
Planned economies are bad okay… Looks at China hmmm.
Technically they are doing targeted investements, grants and tax incentives in their 5 year plans. And they show the direction instead of planning everything down to a carrot.
Jemmy
lumpenproletariat
Share on Mastodon
Share on Reddit
Share on WhatsApp
Gulag 4 U!
So communism is when council communism (understandable), anarchism (huh?) and german idealism (wtf)?
Lenin also has no right to be on the same side as people who took and bastardized his work…..
Anarchism is pretty compatible with Marxism. Marx defined communism as a classless stateless society, which is also the idea of anarchism.
Now I would argue that Lenin didn’t act in the interest of Marx. He formed his vanguard party, that surpressed and killed political dissidents (anarchists for example), but curiously never gave the power back to the people. So he wasn’t really a Marxist, he may have believed that, but in the end he was pretty much just a dictator in my opinion.
This is straight up nonsense, while anarchism and communism broadly share the same goals, they fundamentally oppose one another fundamentally (such as on DOTP, economy, power, etc.). There’s an entire page of Marx & Engels texts attacking anarchism (which should indicate their compatibility), and I’d at least recommend reading The Poverty of Philosophy on the matter. There’s also Lessons from the Counter-Revolution, Spain 1936 which isn’t a critique of anarchism as a whole but does show how non-stalinist communists view anarchists in practice.
The entire second paragraph, though, completely misunderstands marxist theory. Too lazy to respond in detail myself rn, but Revolution Summed Up, specifically the 1917 part shows how Lenin and Bolsheviks were fully consistent with Marxism, and later parts make good arguments as to why counter-revolution took over (hint: it’s not due to some anarchistic notion of “no power to the people").
This is such a classic tankie response. “I basically have no real arguments, but just read these 10 books about theory, trust me bro they agree with me”.
That’s exactly how my conspiracy minded friend argued with me back in the day: “Just trust me, I can’t explain why you’re wrong, but you have to watch this 2 hour Youtube video with me and then you’ll understand why the earth is flat”.
If you can’t even give me real arguments that support your position you either haven’t properly understood the literature you’re talking about or are knowingly lying.
Just so you know his argument was a good faith one. He posed his opinion then backed it up with actual first party documentation on the specific topic. Do you have any idea how hard that is to actually do in philosophy? The person should receive a legitimate physical award to sit on a shelf for making the first cogent researched argument ever posted on the internet. And I am only being hyperbolic about that last bit.
Ah piss off, you literally wrote an opinion that’s just straight up wrong and directly contradicts Marx’s own writings, and now you’re getting angry that I didn’t spend 100x more effort than you writing up some wall of text that nobody is going to read.
Sorry for the absolutely unreasonable suggestion to actually read and learn before acting like an expert on the topic.
Anarchist communism has been the most common kind of anarchist thought throughout the years.
Also Lenin was an opportunist who killed communists because they opposed his counter revolutionary state.
Even worse is when the right one also has Putin, the leader of the Iranian regime, etc. (cough cough Dessalines)
You might be conflating anarcho socialists with communists there.
True. And its sad
This is bait
Those are no “connectors”, those are images. There is no deep meaning in their placement.
And this isn’t bait, it’s an anarchist meme. Hard to bait people who aren’t allowed here.
You don’t allow any kind of communism?
Look at the left side of the image or the sidebar. We allow all communism outside of Marxist-Leninism and its derivative (Maoism, Juche, etc)
i’m just disappointed you didn’t put lenin on both sides. i think. i really can only recognize like 2 of the people on here i’m almost faceblind
Putting Lenin on both sides, or only putting him on the anarchist side, would be so funny
And put Stirner on the right lmfao
Dude I’m too tired and read that as Slimer do it
Looks like the left side were all defeated by capitalist states, too.
How is this more bad than capitalism we already have?
How is authority more bad than authority? It’s not, it’s all authority.
Capitalism is one problem with authoritarian systems, it is not the only problem.
The problem with communism is greed. And people are used to greed. They’ve lived with greed. Grown up with greed. They’ll use greed to be more greedy. So you need a couple generations of people growing up with communism to accomplish communism, and how do you get to that point? It’s a hard situation. It’s difficult.
You can leave the country if you don’t like capitalism. You won’t get shot in back for it. Your family won’t be executed.
You can say fuck Biden, or fuck trump, and you won’t get sent to gulag for it (yet).
There’s levels of bad and communist dictatorships are quite the pinnacle.
I’m sure you can say fuck Biden or fuck Trump in communism too?
I love that joke!
Until 2020 you could get up to 5 years of prison in the Netherlands (same for our head of state). Now you can still can get up to 6 months. Or a nice visit by the police. (Friend said some not nice things on Instagram about Netanyahu. Just that he is a fascist and asshole(and he is). They spend a night in jail.)
Is it as bad as a gulag? Probably not. But in Theory I can now go to prison. So no living in a capitalist country doesn’t mean I can say whatever I want about people. Including trump or Biden
So you see the difference, I’m glad.
Capitalism has more iPhone burgers.
Tbh, I think my anarchist friends here would find a lot to appreciate in Mao.
I once heard Maoism jokingly described as “Anarcho-Stalinism” and that comes from Mao’s insistence, via The Mass Line and the Cultural Revolution, that the party should always root itself in the masses, and that the masses, in turn, should act as a check on the party’s petty bourgeois elements.
He’s very interested in the dialectical relationship between top-down and bottom-up structures in revolution,and how they interact
And anarchists are more interested in destroying the top/bottom approach and focusing on the sideways interactions.
Just as capitalism will always exploit, so will the state. Systems where we must constantly battle to keep them under control while we offload our duties onto them are bound to fail over time.
That is because honestly, communism is a shit system
Stop the writing, hear me out
Centralized plan economies never worked well and then there is that part where you kind of have to force everyone at gun point, become communist or we’ll send in the chekists to murder you and your family. Aahh, the good old little details you never hear about in pro Communism communities where they all call eachother comrade for some weirdo reason
Look, capitalism as we have it now sucks donkey balls too, I doubt there are many that would deny that. However, capitalism is basically allowing free trading, and it’s fucking powerful in generating Wealth. The problem is that that wealth always ends up in the hands of a tiny set of assholes
So how about this: we keep capitalism, and implement wealth caps. Say, 1 million. Nobody is allowed to have a networth of over 1M, the rest goes 100% to taxes. We still have the normal income tax, and taxes on bought goods, but the wealth cap ensured that nobody gets too rich
This has a huge amount of implications. Governments get a huge influx of funds that they can use to fund that giant socialist system that the communists want. That can fund free healthcare, free education, maybe (probably) even universal basic income.
Nobody would be too rich, nobody would be poor. Companies can refocus back on quality because cutting edges to get that extra short term billion dollars won’t do anything anymore because you can’t get any worth out of it over a million.
Want to own a billion dollar company? Well sure! Add at least 1000 shareholders that can invest a million. But they can’t, they also probably want to own something next to a company, I don’t know, a house? So likely you can only invest about 500K into a company so now you got 2000 owners for a company that can employ about 2000 employees. See where I’m going with this? It’s basically communism without thebad parts of communism
Income taxes? Add a bunch mor brackets, with the final one of course being 1M with 100% tax. Unemployed? 0% income tax and the government pays you an income. It won’t be super much but more than enough to survive and live comfortable. If you’re okay like that, then don’t work. We produce enough without requiring everyone to work 5 days a week. With automation skyrocketing, we can work less and less. Want to feel productive and work 5 days a week on your own little store? By all means, do as you like.
It’s a simple change to the existing world, a single rule from which the rest flows out
Nobody would be too rich anymore, nobody would be uber powerful to fuck others over.
I like this idea. Obviously. This is a world that I would live in happily. I’m sure there are loads of little details that need working out, I’m sure that the rather arbitrary 1M might have to be different, depent on inflation, etc, but smarter people than me can worn on that.
To those that come with “1M net worth is not enough I need to retire”, remember that the government can take care of that. Everybody gets their pension. Yes,we can even base it on how much you made. Yes, some people will be slightly richer than others, but only slightly, and I’m fine with that. You don’t need 100M stashed away in funds to be able to retire. A 1M net worth is a single, normal sized home, a car, a bunch of things like clothes on your back and you still got lots left. Big family? Well, both the parents can own part of the home, so now you can buy a home twice the size.
Talking about housing; everything and their mother seems to be overvalued these days. The value of a product should be the cost of making said product (usually comes down to how much humans worked on it) plus a little bit of profit on top of that. A small normal apartment already costing multi million dollars is insanity.
Add a few more simple rules: nobody can own over two homes, companies cannot own homes. With this we could let housing prices cool down to normal.
Add a rule where governments have to find independent press funding organisations that can pay news organizations to make actual independent and reliable news. The money for it will be there, use it. Now we can just wat h the news without the “PLEEAASE PAY US WERE DYING FROM HUNGER” or alternatively having to read pure propaganda
I don’t know, but to me it seems that the biggest problem that this works has right now is that we never bothered to put some caps in certain functions in our societies and that is just plain dumb. I may be thinking too simple here, but these simple caps and rules? I believe they could work, I believe in a world that could function like that.
Yes, I’m sure there will be cheaters, there always will be. However, a cheater would have a net worth of 2M and would be caught and jailed. Nobody gets to have a 700 billion dollar net worth anynore, nobody gets to be ultra powerful
“Communism is when centrally planned economy” is quite the premise to build upon.
Capitalism is unsustainable, wealth caps and other quick fixes will never last.
Capitalism requires growth, and growth must be extracted from the bottom and flow to the top, thus it will always result in inequality and inequality breeds power.
That power will lead to the repeal of said caps and other measures over time.
Capitalism is not the answer, nor are centralised planned economies. Thus the answer is to look beyond both and at direct mutual aid. Gone are the inequality machine or the state that knows what you need best and in its wake are cooperating with others to meet your need for wellbeing. This has largely been the default for all of human existence, local groups produce their goods those goods are given to others in exchange for things needed and they flow along. Except now we have more advanced manufacturing capabilities and understandings to produce even more.
Each community would be able to choose its own methodology that suits the needs of itself and be adaptable to meet its neighbours . Economics is fundamentally the allocation of resources, and this could look like anarcho-communism, mutualism, market anarchism, gift economy or many other forms.
“Planned economies are bad” okay…. Looks at China hmmm.
I know China has a free market portion to their economy, which I think is cool. I also think making the important parts of the economy (you know the parts that everyone relies on daily to live) a part of the government a good thing.
Technically they are doing targeted investements, grants and tax incentives in their 5 year plans. And they show the direction instead of planning everything down to a carrot.
Micro managing is not equal to communism or socialism
Deleted by moderator