Anarchism: Marxism distorted

[The Reformed American Republic]

pretty sure capitalists are the real enemies of marxism. left-unity when?

Don't expect to be treated differently than a Stalinist if you unite with them.

[Sanghyeok]

sure

My first critique is shared by many Marxists, it has a utopian character (" all individuals should have anarchist views and values. According to the Marxist view, that a social idea would follow directly from this human ideal and out of the free will of every individual formed its essence.")

Secondly, it seems like most anarchists are about bringing imagination and flair. I feel like a good chunk of anarchists are anarchists because its are appealing to new leftists (Such was the case when I was an anarchist)

Thirdly it ultimately lacks a credible strategy to turn its ideals and heroism into reality. I'm not saying anarchism isnt possible, because if you look back in human history you will see otherwise. It's the fact that anarchism is almost incapable of dealing with the unevenness of ideas of workers under capitalism. It seems almost incapable of washing away the effect of capitalist ideas in workers' heads and a lot of the time anarchists (at least here in america) make themselves look like jokes

This was just what I had off the top of my head, I was thinking about saying how anarchist revolutions seem unable to defend themselves but thats now always the case

Anarchists in Spain defended themselves against the Nazi-backed fascists for nearly three years, I think you need to give our anarchist comrades more credit.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

pretty sure capitalists are the real enemies of marxism. left-unity when?

Don't expect to be treated differently than a Stalinist if you unite with them.

i wasn't planning on uniting with capitalists

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

sure

My first critique is shared by many Marxists, it has a utopian character (" all individuals should have anarchist views and values. According to the Marxist view, that a social idea would follow directly from this human ideal and out of the free will of every individual formed its essence.")

Secondly, it seems like most anarchists are about bringing imagination and flair. I feel like a good chunk of anarchists are anarchists because its are appealing to new leftists (Such was the case when I was an anarchist)

Thirdly it ultimately lacks a credible strategy to turn its ideals and heroism into reality. I'm not saying anarchism isnt possible, because if you look back in human history you will see otherwise. It's the fact that anarchism is almost incapable of dealing with the unevenness of ideas of workers under capitalism. It seems almost incapable of washing away the effect of capitalist ideas in workers' heads and a lot of the time anarchists (at least here in america) make themselves look like jokes

This was just what I had off the top of my head, I was thinking about saying how anarchist revolutions seem unable to defend themselves but thats now always the case

i think anarchism can work in smallish groups but it's not viable for countries [insert obligatory disclaimer for vatican city here]

[National Capitalist United States]

Don't expect to be treated differently than a Stalinist if you unite with them.

i wasn't planning on uniting with capitalists

I mean, if you want to end up in Gulag for critisizing the People's goverment and your death from starvation from the Gulag's conditions being dismissed as bourgeouis propaganda decades later on Twitter, then sure, unite with the Stalinists.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Don't expect to be treated differently than a Stalinist if you unite with them.

i wasn't planning on uniting with capitalists

Not the point. Don't expect most people to like the concept of allying with wannabe despots. It would pretty much refute the claim that you're different than the tankies who support dictatorships.

I'm not much of a "capitalist" either. Just not a Marxist.

[The Reformed American Republic]

i wasn't planning on uniting with capitalists

I mean, if you want to end up in Gulag for critisizing the People's goverment and your death from starvation from the Gulag's conditions being dismissed as bourgeouis propaganda decades later on Twitter, then sure, unite with the Stalinists.

Not everyone even made it to the Gulag. Some were just shot on the spot or tortured to death.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

I'm leery of allying with anyone authoritarian. It's interesting how leftist unity is talked about alot but never libertarian unity.

[The Reformed American Republic]

I'm leery of allying with anyone authoritarian. It's interesting how leftist unity is talked about alot but never libertarian unity.

Some "libertarians" aren't what they seem, and I'm not just talking about the Hoppean ancaps (though they're an excellent example).

[Duvniask]

I'm leery of allying with anyone authoritarian. It's interesting how leftist unity is talked about alot but never libertarian unity.

But what does it even mean to be "authoritarian" in your view? Is the (potentially violent, preferably peaceful) seizure of power by one class to the detriment of others not an "authoritarian" move?

[The Reformed American Republic]

I'm leery of allying with anyone authoritarian. It's interesting how leftist unity is talked about alot but never libertarian unity.

But what does it even mean to be "authoritarian" in your view? Is the (potentially violent, preferably peaceful) seizure of power by one class to the detriment of others not an "authoritarian" move?

I think he was complaining more about Stalin style brutality, which, to be honest is rightfully condemned. I don't see Rojava thinking that an overthrow is authoritarian.

[Socian]

My first critique is shared by many Marxists, it has a utopian character (" all individuals should have anarchist views and values. According to the Marxist view, that a social idea would follow directly from this human ideal and out of the free will of every individual formed its essence.")

Secondly, it seems like most anarchists are about bringing imagination and flair. I feel like a good chunk of anarchists are anarchists because its are appealing to new leftists (Such was the case when I was an anarchist)

Thirdly it ultimately lacks a credible strategy to turn its ideals and heroism into reality. I'm not saying anarchism isnt possible, because if you look back in human history you will see otherwise. It's the fact that anarchism is almost incapable of dealing with the unevenness of ideas of workers under capitalism. It seems almost incapable of washing away the effect of capitalist ideas in workers' heads and a lot of the time anarchists (at least here in america) make themselves look like jokes

This was just what I had off the top of my head, I was thinking about saying how anarchist revolutions seem unable to defend themselves but thats now always the case

Anarchists in Spain defended themselves against the Nazi-backed fascists for nearly three years, I think you need to give our anarchist comrades more credit.

If you're referring to revolutionary Catalonia then its important to point out that the anarchists were not the only ones fighting there and received support from other factions

[Socian]

I'm leery of allying with anyone authoritarian. It's interesting how leftist unity is talked about alot but never libertarian unity.

But what does it even mean to be "authoritarian" in your view? Is the (potentially violent, preferably peaceful) seizure of power by one class to the detriment of others not an "authoritarian" move?

I think they're referring to how the USSR system of governance, Which I will say, was very complicated and wasn't just what people think it was. I wish people would do more research on this topic because it's actually pretty interesting in my opinion

however, the USSR was pretty authoritarian in some regards no matter how you cut it

[Socian]

But what does it even mean to be "authoritarian" in your view? Is the (potentially violent, preferably peaceful) seizure of power by one class to the detriment of others not an "authoritarian" move?

I think he was complaining more about Stalin style brutality, which, to be honest is rightfully condemned. I don't see Rojava thinking that an overthrow is authoritarian.

If you're talking about revolution, Engels has a good take on this;

"revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?"

[Socian]

I'm leery of allying with anyone authoritarian. It's interesting how leftist unity is talked about alot but never libertarian unity.

I mean the anarchists in rojava work with the PKK, IFB, etc. I find it unsettling how quick some less authoritarian leftists(I refuse to say "lib left" because I think the political compass is stupid) are quick to work with capitalists. I dislike some anarchists, but work with others on a daily basis and would take them over capitalists anyyyyyy day.

I'd also take them over trotskyists, because at least anarchists don't collaborate with fascists lol

[Borderlands of Rojava]

I'm leery of allying with anyone authoritarian. It's interesting how leftist unity is talked about alot but never libertarian unity.

I mean the anarchists in rojava work with the PKK, IFB, etc. I find it unsettling how quick some less authoritarian leftists(I refuse to say "lib left" because I think the political compass is stupid) are quick to work with capitalists. I dislike some anarchists, but work with others on a daily basis and would take them over capitalists anyyyyyy day.

I'd also take them over trotskyists, because at least anarchists don't collaborate with fascists lol

I would never work with fascists but I don't think there's anything wrong with working with right libertarians. Not only are they against the same people as us, but their view of the economy isn't as different as you may think.

Different but not as different.

[Western Theram]

sure

My first critique is shared by many Marxists, it has a utopian character (" all individuals should have anarchist views and values. According to the Marxist view, that a social idea would follow directly from this human ideal and out of the free will of every individual formed its essence.")

implying marxist philosophy isn't utopian, i mean you started this thread with the idea that we(anarchists) are the true enemies of marxism
Secondly, it seems like most anarchists are about bringing imagination and flair. I feel like a good chunk of anarchists are anarchists because its are appealing to new leftists (Such was the case when I was an anarchist)

i say this with the best of intentions but i think you got it backwards, are there lies and propaganda about the USSR that aren't true? Yes. but it looks like you're trying so hard to defend a system that didn't work. i went through a phase where i read almost all i could on marx, stalin, and mao. i even bought a soviet flag, but i soon realized how i was buying into a different kind of propaganda. when you start defending gulags and hitmen you should stop and think about your ideas for a bit.
not everyone liked stalin but they kept quiet cause he bullied his way to the top of the party. hell even lenin didn't want stalin to take over. what threat was trotsky exactly? he was no capitalist he just had a different vision than stalin but was exiled. you say that's not true but what could possibly justify sending an assassin after him? have you read any of his work?

Thirdly it ultimately lacks a credible strategy to turn its ideals and heroism into reality. I'm not saying anarchism isnt possible, because if you look back in human history you will see otherwise. It's the fact that anarchism is almost incapable of dealing with the unevenness of ideas of workers under capitalism. It seems almost incapable of washing away the effect of capitalist ideas in workers' heads and a lot of the time anarchists (at least here in america) make themselves look like jokes

what exactly does that mean? how exactly are marxists 'washing away the capitalist ideas' and anarchists are not?
This was just what I had off the top of my head, I was thinking about saying how anarchist revolutions seem unable to defend themselves but thats now always the case

[Western Theram]

I'm leery of allying with anyone authoritarian. It's interesting how leftist unity is talked about alot but never libertarian unity.

I mean the anarchists in rojava work with the PKK, IFB, etc. I find it unsettling how quick some less authoritarian leftists(I refuse to say "lib left" because I think the political compass is stupid) are quick to work with capitalists. I dislike some anarchists, but work with others on a daily basis and would take them over capitalists anyyyyyy day.

I'd also take them over trotskyists, because at least anarchists don't collaborate with fascists lol

hahahahahahahaha

[Czechostan]

Edit: When referring to anarchists, know that I am referring to ancoms and other anarchists who claim to be Marxists.

This is the first time I've used the forums in my 3ish years of using nations states, so my apologies if this isn't the best!

When anarchists present themselves, they say that they are true Marxists and that they follow Marx and Engels's teachings. However, this is an absolute lie. In this short little forum thing, I will show you why anarchists are distorting Marxism and by default, enemies of marxism.

1. Our first example comes from Marx himself, in section II of the communist manifesto (page 75) Marx says: "We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class, is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling as to win the battle of democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible.". Now, anarchists will claim "Marx hated the state!" and this is somewhat true, but they aren't telling you the whole thing.


You see, Marx hated the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie's state (" The executive of the modern state is nothing but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie."). Yet Marx himself was a strong supporter of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the transitory state. Thus anarchists have completely ignored (purposefully or accidentally) Marx and his teachings.

2. People, for whatever reason, seem to forget about Engels. Engels was a close friend of Marx and one of the founders of Modern Communism and thus his opinions are just as important as Marx's. So what did Engels think of the state and anarchists? This is an excerpt from Engel's "on authority" (you can find the whole thing on marxists.org if you're interested in reading more)

"Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state is abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other party by means of rifles, bayonets, and cannon — authoritarian means if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?"

As we can see, Engel's too believed in the transitory state and throws some blows at anarchists for basically being foolish (paraphrasing obviously). So it would appear that anarchists are not true Marxists, but rather, revisionist distorters of Marxism. Now I will give anarchists a little credit, they do make pretty good friends.

As Stalin once said in Anarchism or Marxism; "We believe anarchists are the true enemies of marxism"

OP, have you by chance seen CCK Philosophy's video where he refutes the notion that Marx believed in a transitory state? What are your thoughts?

[Socian]

My first critique is shared by many Marxists, it has a utopian character (" all individuals should have anarchist views and values. According to the Marxist view, that a social idea would follow directly from this human ideal and out of the free will of every individual formed its essence.")

implying marxist philosophy isn't utopian, i mean you started this thread with the idea that we(anarchists) are the true enemies of marxism
Secondly, it seems like most anarchists are about bringing imagination and flair. I feel like a good chunk of anarchists are anarchists because its are appealing to new leftists (Such was the case when I was an anarchist)

i say this with the best of intentions but i think you got it backwards, are there lies and propaganda about the USSR that aren't true? Yes. but it looks like you're trying so hard to defend a system that didn't work. i went through a phase where i read almost all i could on marx, stalin, and mao. i even bought a soviet flag, but i soon realized how i was buying into a different kind of propaganda. when you start defending gulags and hitmen you should stop and think about your ideas for a bit.
not everyone liked stalin but they kept quiet cause he bullied his way to the top of the party. hell even lenin didn't want stalin to take over. what threat was trotsky exactly? he was no capitalist he just had a different vision than stalin but was exiled. you say that's not true but what could possibly justify sending an assassin after him? have you read any of his work?

Thirdly it ultimately lacks a credible strategy to turn its ideals and heroism into reality. I'm not saying anarchism isnt possible, because if you look back in human history you will see otherwise. It's the fact that anarchism is almost incapable of dealing with the unevenness of ideas of workers under capitalism. It seems almost incapable of washing away the effect of capitalist ideas in workers' heads and a lot of the time anarchists (at least here in america) make themselves look like jokes

what exactly does that mean? how exactly are marxists 'washing away the capitalist ideas' and anarchists are not?
This was just what I had off the top of my head, I was thinking about saying how anarchist revolutions seem unable to defend themselves but thats now always the case

agh this was super trippy to read.

For what I am referencing you should read "Anarchism: A Marxist Criticism" as it puts it into words better than I can

I mean the anarchists in rojava work with the PKK, IFB, etc. I find it unsettling how quick some less authoritarian leftists(I refuse to say "lib left" because I think the political compass is stupid) are quick to work with capitalists. I dislike some anarchists, but work with others on a daily basis and would take them over capitalists anyyyyyy day.

I'd also take them over trotskyists, because at least anarchists don't collaborate with fascists lol

hahahahahahahaha

Yeah, thats not the type of collaboration im talking about. Trotksy worked with the imperial japanese and the nazis to put himself in power

showing images isnt really an argument lol

[Socian]

Edit: When referring to anarchists, know that I am referring to ancoms and other anarchists who claim to be Marxists.

This is the first time I've used the forums in my 3ish years of using nations states, so my apologies if this isn't the best!

When anarchists present themselves, they say that they are true Marxists and that they follow Marx and Engels's teachings. However, this is an absolute lie. In this short little forum thing, I will show you why anarchists are distorting Marxism and by default, enemies of marxism.

1. Our first example comes from Marx himself, in section II of the communist manifesto (page 75) Marx says: "We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class, is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling as to win the battle of democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible.". Now, anarchists will claim "Marx hated the state!" and this is somewhat true, but they aren't telling you the whole thing.


You see, Marx hated the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie's state (" The executive of the modern state is nothing but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie."). Yet Marx himself was a strong supporter of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the transitory state. Thus anarchists have completely ignored (purposefully or accidentally) Marx and his teachings.

2. People, for whatever reason, seem to forget about Engels. Engels was a close friend of Marx and one of the founders of Modern Communism and thus his opinions are just as important as Marx's. So what did Engels think of the state and anarchists? This is an excerpt from Engel's "on authority" (you can find the whole thing on marxists.org if you're interested in reading more)

"Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state is abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other party by means of rifles, bayonets, and cannon — authoritarian means if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?"

As we can see, Engel's too believed in the transitory state and throws some blows at anarchists for basically being foolish (paraphrasing obviously). So it would appear that anarchists are not true Marxists, but rather, revisionist distorters of Marxism. Now I will give anarchists a little credit, they do make pretty good friends.

As Stalin once said in Anarchism or Marxism; "We believe anarchists are the true enemies of marxism"

OP, have you by chance seen CCK Philosophy's video where he refutes the notion that Marx believed in a transitory state? What are your thoughts?

I actually have not, I'll watch it sometime today though. However, I doubt that marx didnt believe in a transitionary state as its made pretty obvious in his work that he does

[Adamede]

pretty sure capitalists are the real enemies of marxism. left-unity when?

Plenty of anarchists killed by Bolshevik bullets

[Adamede]

Considering how marxists states generally turn out I think the anarchists have a point here.

The problem with how they turned out is the first problem every Marxist state has faced; revisionism. Look at the soviet union for example, it was doing great before they implemented capitalist elements into the system 2nd fastest growing economy in the world, racial hierarchy almost entirely dismantled, education is free, more doctors per capita than most of the world, doubled the life expectancy, 20-26 years away from catching up with the western world, in the high 90(%) for literacy, etc.

Then everything starts going down the drain once the revisionists took power and started implementing capitalist elements.

The Soviet Union was an authoritarian imperialist state throughout its entire existence. And none of that listed is worth millions of dead.

[Socian]

pretty sure capitalists are the real enemies of marxism. left-unity when?

Plenty of anarchists killed by Bolshevik bullets

Plenty of everyone killed by bullets

[Greater Cesnica]

Here's a question for y'all: do you believe that the concept of right-wing economics is morally less repugnant than that of Stalinist authoritarianism?