Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

What is the difference? Socialism, Marxism, Communism, etc.

01:10 / 21.11.05

I asked this question in this thread and someone suggested making a whole new thread. Mods - is this the right forum? Move it if you feel otherwise.

What is the difference between Marxism, Socialism, Communism and any other related form?

this cube sings Brel said: "Marxism is the position that as long as a few people control all the capital they will exploit workers until they can't takes it no more and the workers rise up and take control.

Communism is when everything owns everything and, ideally, everyone gets what they needs and works as much as they can. Generally thought only possible via revolution predicted by Marxism. Falls apart (some would say inevitably) when bastards such as Stalin suck up all the power again.

Stalinism is fascism under the guise of communism.

Socialism is reckoning Marx was probably right, but realising that revolution ain't necessarily a good thing, so let's make sure the workers get looked after at the expense of the capitalists."

this cube also said: "Let the arguments begin."

Are these definitions adequate? Are they completely wrong? I think this thread might also be benefited from reference to this thread. I think this discussion on the various -isms is representative of the question of labels and terms. Are they arbitrary?

ONLY NICE THINGS

08:03 / 21.11.05

Well, adequate for what, exactly? If you want crude, ahistorical generalisations about the terms, then they're fine. If you're trying to write an essay about them, probably less so.

09:48 / 21.11.05

i agree with qou, haus, that maybe a few looks in variant dictionaries (whilst keeping in mind who are the respective publishers) would help better for just clear definitions.

anyway, i would propose that a discussion of the terms here has its use: insofar every definition is part of a larger worldview and "tunnel-reality", their clash might be fruitful.

on the term "marxism": i would say marxism is about a bit more than a single proposition. it is a certain way to see human history, culture, economics, even mindsets, coming from hegel's dialectic philosophy of history, but without the idealistic-deistic stance of the "weltgeist", instead of which marx introduces "The Way People Organise Necessary Work" as the driving power behind history and thus creates the DIALECTIC (=hegelian in the form) MATERIALISM (=anti-idealist in the presuppositions).
the materialist bit was not only usable as a "party-ideology" in the time's class wars. it was (and stays) IMHO a great tool to undermine false claims of authority and (not only economically) repressive "traditions".

to communism: there are two flavors: A the marxist-communist aka. bolshevik aka. marxist-leninist, and B the anarchist-communist aka. anarchosyndicalist aka. bakuninist.

the former was more succesful then the latter, so it's ground theory - marxism - is identified with all communist ideas. the theories of bakunin and marx agree on the historical necessity of a revolution and on the far goal of a "class-less society", but the disagree about the "main contradiction" in industrial society (marx: between capital and work, bakunin: between state and individual), and therefore, on the means that can possibly bring forth the communist goal. marx and bakunin were also personal enemies in that both wanted to be the "only rightful philosopher of the worker's movement".

Tom Paine's Bones

06:46 / 27.11.05

to communism: there are two flavors: A the marxist-communist aka. bolshevik aka. marxist-leninist, and B the anarchist-communist aka. anarchosyndicalist aka. bakuninist.
I think that's possibly a bit of an overgeneralisation. I'd see Bolshevism as a specific interpretation of Marxism as opposed to being Marxism per se.

And there's certainly some crossover between the more libertarian wing of Marxism and certain anarchist ideas. The POUM and Gorter are reasonably good historical examples of this.

For modern groups see the Socialist Party of Great Britain or Red Action. But they generally tend to be groups who either neither were Leninist or broke conclusively with it.

I'd agree with your summary of the differences between Marx and Bakunin. There were political differences certainly. But my view has always been that what actually led to the split between the two of them is the fact that they both had egos the size of a small planet.