I am an anarchist. But I am not an asshole, I would like to understand why some communists are so hostile against anarchist and why some anarchist are so hostile toward communism.

I don’t understand that. There are a lot of common ways of doing things between anarchists and communism and we both have the goal.

It can seem like a very stupid post, but I am really trying to understand :)

    • Micalet
      1·
      4 years ago

      I do not think is WE, I think is the leaders, that take us as their market share and like to fight for it instead of embrace coopetition (cooperation and competition)

  • SFloss (they/them)
    41·
    4 years ago

    Communists tend to see anarchism as idealist and thus not rooted enough in reality to bring actual, lasting change. A good summary of communist criticisms of anarchism can be found on Cuba’s Wikipedia-like site.

    https://www.ecured.cu/Anarquismo

    • SnowCodeOP
      21·
      4 years ago

      Well, anarchist is more complex than that. It’s not always individualist, “subjective” (???, what is objective then?). They are basically saying anarchist understands nothing. Which is wrong, we agree on Marxism on many points, except centralization.

      This is not an accurate definition of anarchism according to me and is very reductive.

      You can’t really make a good critic when the definition itself is different for everybody.

        • SFloss (they/them)
          2·
          4 years ago

          I don’t think I agree with this opinion. Objectivity and subjectivity exist in dialectical unity and employing only one of these in any analyses will ultimately lead you to an incomplete worldview and praxis. Both are necessary.

          “For this individual the subjective aspect exists only in relation to the objective aspect (the concrete reality, which is the object of analysis). Subjectivity and objectivity thus join in a dialectical unity producing knowledge in solidarity with action, and vice versa.” - Paulo Freire in Pedagogy of the Oppressed

            • SFloss (they/them)
              2·
              4 years ago

              Subjectivity will always be subordinate to objectivity

              Yeah I definitely agree with you here, the universe is objective and from that material reality people have their own subjective experiences. As I said, they both exist in dialectical unity. So because they both exist in this way, you absolutely can’t ignore subjectivity when engaging in solidarity with others and analyzing their material reality. You’d wouldn’t be getting the full picture of how their objective reality interacts with their subjective experiences and vice versa.

        • SnowCodeOP
          1·
          4 years ago

          I am saying the definition is different for everyone because anarchist and communist don’t define anarchism the same way. Anarchist wants to abolish hierarchy, that’s the definition. What ever type of anarchism, it remains the same. I don’t really see what’s subjective in this.

          Which is not the same as the definition given on the article.

  • Micalet
    2·
    4 years ago

    The cooperative, and union of cooperatives that even inside a capitalist world can be a movement to fight corporations, have been used by governing communist parties as a tool in sectors where planification and orders from far away do not work.

    But in political parties people treat their side as a sport team.

    What I do not understand is why COOPERATIVES, specially in places with unemployment, are not being promoted and subsidiced by politicians, specially leftist ones as a tool to improve employment, salaries, intake, in the long term and leftist vote.

  • xe8
    31·
    4 years ago

    It’s probably a mix of legitimate grievances, and misunderstandings on both sides.

    In the end we’re so deep in Capitalist hell, that up to a point most of us only subscribe to a particular ideology in theory. It’s a bit pointless to argue too much about details about different ideologies when there’s so much work we can be doing to be building power in our workplaces, mutual aid / community support networks, open source technologies, etc.

    At least we can all agree on a few things such as being anti-capitalist and anti-fascist, and work from there.

    I guess in the end we only have control over our own actions, so on your own part it’s a good idea to find out what criticisms MLs may have. Read some ML theory, don’t repeat garbage from the Black Book of Communism, and support the real progress Marxists, etc. have made. But apart from that, just concentrate on tangible projects.

  • pleasemakesense@lemmy.world
    1·
    1 year ago

    They’re marxist-leninists, so the notion that all institutions are inherently oppressive doesn’t sit right with them since the communist party is the leaders or vanguard party of the worker movement and supposed to institute the dictatorship of the proletariet. Together with other ideas introduced by Stalin, that kind of communism is totalitarian in nature which is obviously counter to what anarchism aims to achieve

  • Gresham's Law
    12·
    1 year ago

    You’re creating a lot of logic trauma there, what bubbles are living in or is this Psychological/Informational Warfare (PsyOps) that makes more sense?!

    • An anarchist is the definition of being reckless & self-centred and from experience most of them are corrupt.
    • Communism is being used as a scapegoat in Conservative/Neo-Liberal environments to create representational trauma around Marxism & proliferate one sadistic agenda.
    • Who would want to live in a Communist environment, never knew anyone who had a convincing/constructive argument that proves it.

    Repression/Regression/Chaos/Divide/Disorder These factors are a recipe for disasters.

    Socialism is key in democracy, it tightens the tie around those who prioritise execution over sustainability/quantity over quality & creates enough balance of power for the society to thrive & any neighbouring country.

    It only takes one for others to follow.