Anarchists are not Marxists

Sep 2010
119
9
Fort Lee NJ
How to distinguish a Marxist from a non-Marxist? Everyone who believes that the proletarian dictatorship is needed, after the overthrow of capitalism, to improve social conditions, is a Marxist. The idea of proletarian dictatorship unites all kinds of communists, Stalinists, Trotskyites, Leninists, etc. Anarchists, are not Marxists because they are against any form of state (capitalist and socialist). But all communists are Marxists and all Marxists are communists. These social engineers, like Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union, form parties that are said to be "the vanguards of proletariat."



Ludwik Kowalski, author of "Hell on Earth: Brutality and Violence Under the Stalinist regime." The link is:



h*ttp://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/father2/introduction.html (but no *)
 
Aug 2009
1,287
40
Martinez, California USA
kowalskil said:
How to distinguish a Marxist from a non-Marxist? Everyone who believes that the proletarian dictatorship is needed, after the overthrow of capitalism, to improve social conditions, is a Marxist. The idea of proletarian dictatorship unites all kinds of communists, Stalinists, Trotskyites, Leninists, etc. Anarchists, are not Marxists because they are against any form of state (capitalist and socialist). But all communists are Marxists and all Marxists are communists. These social engineers, like Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union, form parties that are said to be "the vanguards of proletariat."



Ludwik Kowalski, author of "Hell on Earth: Brutality and Violence Under the Stalinist regime." The link is:



h*ttp://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/father2/introduction.html (but no *)


Then presumably anarchists wish that society would revert to the law of the jungle, and also presumably believe that they would emerge at the top of the food chain?



Or is it that they are at their core, destroyers, and simply lust for the opportunity to thwart the concerted organizational efforts of others?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Nov 2010
2
0
@scrjnki



Interesting stuff. Your response had the addendum "presumably," which is important because any serious reading of Anarchist philosophy (Bakunin, Kropotkin, Chomsky, etc) would quickly refute this presumption and answer your later questions. Anarchism has long been a rather vague ethos, I would say intentionally so. Therefore, there is perhaps no ONE Anarchist that can claim authority (no pun intended) to speak for all. However, I will give you a quick slice of my own self-described, Anarchist views. I do not believe in the "law of the jungle" or Darwinism as the basis for society. I believe in a highly organized society along progressive principles. What many Anarchists, such as myself, object to is the notion of the "State." Not the State as in ANY form of social organization, but rather the State, i.e. government, as a body that is separate and alienated from the community or communities that it claims to represent.
 
Aug 2009
1,287
40
Martinez, California USA
sisko52744 said:
@scrjnki



Interesting stuff. Your response had the addendum "presumably," which is important because any serious reading of Anarchist philosophy (Bakunin, Kropotkin, Chomsky, etc) would quickly refute this presumption and answer your later questions. Anarchism has long been a rather vague ethos, I would say intentionally so. Therefore, there is perhaps no ONE Anarchist that can claim authority (no pun intended) to speak for all. However, I will give you a quick slice of my own self-described, Anarchist views. I do not believe in the "law of the jungle" or Darwinism as the basis for society. I believe in a highly organized society along progressive principles. What many Anarchists, such as myself, object to is the notion of the "State." Not the State as in ANY form of social organization, but rather the State, i.e. government, as a body that is separate and alienated from the community or communities that it claims to represent.


Well then if I read you correctly, your view of anarchy is based on scale, and the level of detachment of a state from the people? In which case...neighborhood=best, community=all right, county=barely OK, state=not so good and federal=not good at all?



Small government? Local control? Liberty? Resistence to centralized decision making?



If so, then perhaps political thinking, as time and history, is circular rather than linear... for it would seem you have met the Tea Party on the other side.
 
Nov 2010
2
0
@scrjnki



My conception of Anarchism does include, among other things, the trend of decentralization which you break down.



Perhaps the Tea Party seems to agree (I would question their commitment to this principle) with the long-standing Anarchist principle of de-centralized government, but, generally speaking, Anarchists WILDLY differ from Tea Party members. Just to mention a few items from their charter:



Illegal Aliens Are Here illegally (though this doesn't say anything, the implication is clear)

Stronger Military Is Essential.

Political Offices Available To Average Citizens.

English As Core Language Is Required.

Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged.



Most Anarchists will feel sick in their stomach at any one of these precepts. Most political philosophies, even ones that I wildly disagree with overall, contain some kernels-of-truth that I agree with. However, that does not make me an associate of theirs.
 
May 2010
87
0
@scrjnki



My conception of Anarchism does include, among other things, the trend of decentralization which you break down.



Perhaps the Tea Party seems to agree (I would question their commitment to this principle) with the long-standing Anarchist principle of de-centralized government, but, generally speaking, Anarchists WILDLY differ from Tea Party members. Just to mention a few items from their charter:



Illegal Aliens Are Here illegally (though this doesn't say anything, the implication is clear)

Stronger Military Is Essential.

Political Offices Available To Average Citizens.

English As Core Language Is Required.

Traditional Family Values Are Encouraged.



Most Anarchists will feel sick in their stomach at any one of these precepts. Most political philosophies, even ones that I wildly disagree with overall, contain some kernels-of-truth that I agree with. However, that does not make me an associate of theirs.


Some forms of anarchism can represent Truth. However, like all political ideologies, are full of inferiors who distort the real meaning of anarchism.



Certainly, you are correct that all the above listed propositions should make any anarchist sick. Especially the military and family unit.
 
Aug 2009
1,287
40
Martinez, California USA
Some forms of anarchism can represent Truth. However, like all political ideologies, are full of inferiors who distort the real meaning of anarchism.



Certainly, you are correct that all the above listed propositions should make any anarchist sick. Especially the military and family unit.


Maybe they would not make any and every anarchist sick. After all, who really gets appointed to define a political dogma? Who would do the appointing? In the end, even with an agreed definition, a quest for political purity is a quest on the same level as one for a pet unicorn.



It ain't gonna happen 'cause it ain't real.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Sep 2011
7
0
Malaysia
Anarchists can be either economically socialist or capitalist. But it seemed that the more influential anarchists are the socialist ones (such as those in the Spanish Civil War)
 
Oct 2011
16
0
On looking up one legal definition of anarchy, the reference I used suggested the following: "...is the non-existence of government." If I interpret Marxism as the political, economic and social principles and policies advocated by Karl Marx. This leaves me to believe I could be an insincere Anarchist and a Marxist. My sense of selfishness for survival is finally attuned. I can readily switch from one camp to another based on self interest. What I definitely am not is a Martyr 'ist'.