Bridging the Gap: Anarchism & Communism

I've noticed a lot of dispute between Anarchists and Communists. Not only in this forum, but on others as well. Even in history, there has been much hostility between leading political figures such as Marx and Bakunin, or during the Spanish Civil War. It seems to me that a lot of time is wasted between the two 'sides' arguing with each other over which ideal is best, instead of fighting the common enemy, the State. Sure, debating is good, but a lot of the time I notice that's ussually about random things that really shouldn't be an issue.

I have my reasons why I prefer Anarchism over Communism, but in the end, the philosophies arn't that different. You could even say that Anarchism is a more extreme form of Communism.

But seriously, if we ever want to see a free society, I think it's time that Communists and Anarchists start getting their shit together and start finding common ground, instead of constantly arguing. Maybe this is happening already, I really don't know. I'm only expressing my opinion and I'm sure others have done the same before.
I know this will sound super cheesy, but I think we need to 'join forces' and work towards the dissolution of the State, instead of going seperate ways. Or at least be able to co-exist in harmony without having to argue which system is best.
What do you think? Is this a naive opinion or do others feel the same.

 

No, it's naive.

Anarchists are antiauthoritarian, while marxists are about as authoritarian as you can get.

Anarchists want to dissolve the state.
Marxists want to take it over in the name of the "people".

Communism places the power out of the hands of one group of elites and places into the hands of another.

As long as communists must us violence, force, and coersion to obtain, maintain, and sustain their economic and political systems.... i'll keep my distance.

 

The whole Left needs a common ground.

 

I do disagree with the communist idea that there should be a transitional society and one group of people who "guide" the rest of the population towards freedom. There's too much of a risk for that group to become another set of dictators. I know a lot of Marxists might disagree with me, butI see the U.S.S.R. is a perfect example of what could happen in such a situation.
The only reason I bring this up is because it only seems logical that two groups of people with the same goal work together to overthrow a common enemy instead of fighting each other.

 

only problem is that marxists are not antistate. they are anit capitalism and see the state as a means to an end, a powerful tool. I will not allow shackles of oppression to be replaced by another pair under another name.

Socialists in general irritate the hell out of me.
Such fans of the law, any law....

 

As far as I see, being in Australia, the majority of marxists these days are democratic socialists, because they have woken up to the idea that absolute authoritarianism is a ludicrous and impractical idea. In such a case I think GR has a massive point and if anything I agree with nearly all of your principles except your bloody stubborn and righteous attitude.

Lets stop being petty bitches...........but then will men always be bitches?

 

Marxists want to dissolve the state, thats why they're called Communists. Abolition of the state and capital in a classless society is the idea. Marxists don't take it over in the name of the people, but rather take it over with the people.

Marxists aren't necessarily authoritarian. I'm not an authoritarian. I've been called an anarcho-communist before though. I'm also for democratic socialism, as that will come before communism.

I see the virtures of authoritism and why many marxists turn to it, but using force just oppresses people and goes agianst the general will (unfortunately having a will or being philosophical is a luxury the working class can't enjoy, so they remain apathetic). The general will is necessary to have a legitimate government.

The working class won't suddenly open their eyes. They will become enraged when they find themselves bound by the shackles of capitalism, and bust free, the same way a prisoner in a jail thinks of escaping. It will also happen on a world scale, not in some isolated and backwards cold country.

Socialism > Communism (After years and years of socialism) > Anarchy (but not in our lifetimes)

ALSO! I would like to point out that not all Marxists support a party leading the people to revolution. I think a party would make it easier, but the revolution will happen with or without a party. The main goal of a marxist party should be to create a decentralized government. I thought of a good system but I'm tired and can't write about it right now. I might make a thread about it later.

 

Bridging the Gap: Anarchism & Communism

Anarchist's tend to be too emotionally charged and too impatient to promote a realistic dialectic.

Marx, for all the impatience of his material-dialectic, was still far more realistic than the more idealistic anarchists.

Marx understood that, after ten-thousand years of hierarchical state authority, deeply engrained behavioral patterns of fear-driven triggers and responses could not disapear without many generations of dialectical evolution.

I resist all authority, yet I know the time of day, and I know the year, and I know that in this current reality, any realistic dialectic must start with, not only The State, but Property as well.