Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Brick wrote

Kropotkin explains it best:

Marxists have the bad (but deliberate) habit of confusing 'state' for 'society'. So of course they always end up making allowances for statism both in theory and practice.

Since they have a monopoly on the word 'communism', we're better off using our word because it's been conceived to not make allowances for hierarchy or 'temporary' states.

Anarchism is more than a set of economic theories - it's an unending struggle for autonomy and a stand against authority. Marxism doesn't gel with anarchy's primary drive, and that's why there's so much conflict between us historically. We simply don't want the same things.


JoeMemo OP wrote (edited )

I find this piece about Bakunin's stance against Marxist communism to be helpful.

He said:

The most fatal combination that could possibly be formed, would be to unite socialism to absolutism

Which was a frightenly accurate prediction of every communist revolution that occured over the next 100 years.

The prediction by Engels that the seizing and centralising of property would be the state’s last official act [9] proved to be a sick joke on the workers of the Stalinist countries.