You sure?
marxists.org
What's the Marxist critique of Anarchism...
Leo Wilson
Owen King
And yet they never have. Individualism splits off to do its own thing, but that's usually from a sense of betrayal of any revolutionary movement, not the cause.
A favorite critique of the bully statists. Historically, the chief saboteurs of the libertarian-socialist.
The revolution that succeeds inspires the mass majority to reject political solutions (states and their elected bodies) and press for the social revolution. When a statist "socialist" betrays them by seizing power and establishing a dictatorship, the revolution loses its whole point and momentum. Then the capitalists sail in and use this failure as propaganda.
Hunter Garcia
Paris, the central seat of the old governmental power, and, at the same time, the social stronghold of the French working class, had risen in arms against the attempt of Thiers and the Rurals to restore and perpetuate that old governmental power bequeathed to them by the empire. Paris could resist only because, in consequence of the siege, it had got rid of the army, and replaced it by a National Guard, the bulk of which consisted of working men. This fact was now to be transformed into an institution. The first decree of the Commune, therefore, was the suppression of the standing army, and the substitution for it of the armed people.
t. marx
marxists.org
Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Well and good, gentlemen, do you want to know what this dictatorship looks like? Look at the Paris Commune. That was the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
t. engels
marxists.org
Christopher Morales
::thinking emoji::
What did he mean by this?
Brody Nelson
Did you actually fucking read it? Take a look at this line towards the end:
The paris commune used a fucking workers militia you dipshit.
As for the OP: the biggest problem I have with anarchism is their tendency to fetishize automonous local organisation over large scale global organisation (both during the revolution and afterwards during communism). Localism renders a revolutionary movement to weak to spread and resist counterrevolution, and well as being utterly insufficient to organise production on a needs basis post-revolution. Separate automous will inevitably give rise to commodity production: society wide planning is necessary to overcome this, but unfortunately many anarchists tend to oppose this as they tend to believe this necessitates a state apparatus (it doesn't, but I can't fucked arguing this point for the N'th time).
Before some anarchist gets angry at me for saying this: yes, I'm aware this doesn't apply to all anarchists (the cybernetic planning threads are proof enough).
Joseph Ward
Read the Civil War in France and Engels’ postscript
Henry Wood
Wew, good luck infiltrating and sabotaging the state apparatus when the fascists take over. You'll just get gulag'd and then you'll be no good to anyone.
Michael Fisher
Not a Marxist or an anarchist (more of a leftcomm) but this is what I get from most Marxists:
1. Marxism is dialectical, whereas anarchism is metaphysical.
2. Anarchism relies on a lot of heavy assumptions whereas Marxism, as a science, can better prepare itself to be put into practice given the material conditions.
3. Anarchism is absolutist, whereas Marxism never deals in absolutes but in dialectics.
4. Anarchists have a different definition of the state than Marxists.
5. Most arguments for anarchism are based on appeals to emotion, rather than logic.
6. Marxism-Leninism has a much stronger history of bettering living standards and liberating people from colonialism, imperialism, etc.
7. Marxists understand revolution is a process whereas anarchists demand everything at once.
Josiah Scott
I don't know how you can be a marxist and still support the "withering away of the State" tbh (which has never been done as marxists theorists have theorized either). I wonder if marxists keep supporting it out of spite towards anarkiddies.
Oliver Ross
That's your logic right now comrade.