• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the term "anarcho-communist" an oxymoron?

The thread title.

  • Yes

    Votes: 7 41.2%
  • No

    Votes: 10 58.8%

  • Total voters
    17

Black_Zawisza

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
606
Reaction score
259
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
As I see it, it's impossible to be an anarcho-communist. Let's suppose that government is gone and some guys want to start a commune, but others don't want to be part of it. What are you supposed to do? Either you must allow them to not be part of one (which makes one an anarcho-capitalist, since under such a system you can organize a commune with other like-minded individuals, BUT you allow others the freedom to not be part of one) or you must not (in which case you're just a closeted pinko).

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Political labels are fairly arbitrary and tend to twisted in agenda's, so taking the literal meaning is rarely useful. Anarcho-Communism actually existed in parts of Republican Spain for a brief period, although it was crushed by Fascism rather quickly. The anarchists primary consisted of various trade unions and worker owned enterprises.

Confederación Nacional del Trabajo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Black_Zawisza

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
606
Reaction score
259
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Political labels are fairly arbitrary and tend to twisted in agenda's, so taking the literal meaning is rarely useful. Anarcho-Communism actually existed in parts of Republican Spain for a brief period, although it was crushed by Fascism rather quickly. The anarchists primary consisted of various trade unions and worker owned enterprises.

Confederación Nacional del Trabajo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You are ignoring my point. It's unavoidable; you must either allow people to be free of the commune (anarcho-capitalism by default, with one forming a voluntary communist association with others) or you must coerce them into it (oppressive, human-right-violating communism).

Is a commune a form of government?
Depends on whether it's a voluntary association or people are forced into it.
 
Last edited:

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
243,800
Reaction score
73,365
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Depends-Mikhail Bakunin might weigh in if he were still alive. There were two themes of communism-the Marxist-Leninist statist strain and the anarcho-syndicalists. The latter wanted to tear everything down to anarchy and the create a communist society from the ruins as opposed to the more common class struggle "dictatorship of the proletariat evolutionary model
 

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You are ignoring my point. It's unavoidable; you must either allow people to be free of the commune (anarcho-capitalism by default, with one forming a voluntary communist association with others) or you must coerce them into it (oppressive, human-right-violating communism).
You assign to much values to labels. In reality, anarcho-communism was actually a form of highly decentralized local government based on consensus and loose democracy. Anarcho-capitalism has never been implemented in real life, so it is purely theoretical. Even places like Somalia that don't have any government still have some form of organization with warlords and tribes.
 

Black_Zawisza

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
606
Reaction score
259
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Depends-Mikhail Bakunin might weigh in if he were still alive. There were two themes of communism-the Marxist-Leninist statist strain and the anarcho-syndicalists. The latter wanted to tear everything down to anarchy and the create a communist society from the ruins as opposed to the more common class struggle "dictatorship of the proletariat evolutionary model
ARGH! You ignore the point made in the OP. What if you don't want to be part of the commune? Do they allow you freedom, or do they line you up against the wall and POP! goes the weasel?

You assign to much values to labels.
Labels exist for a reason. If things and concepts don't have the attributes we ascribe to them, then the labels are inaccurate and ought to be altered. There's nothing wrong with labels that are accurate.

In reality, anarcho-communism was actually a form of highly decentralized local government
Hmm...government. I see. Anarcho-communist government. Sorry, that just doesn't work.

...based on consensus and loose democracy. Anarcho-capitalism has never been implemented in real life, so it is purely theoretical.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism#Historical_precedents_similar_to_anarcho-capitalism

Even places like Somalia that don't have any government still have some form of organization with warlords and tribes.
If that's how you define anarcho-capitalism, then anarcho-capitalism is a human impossibility. Humans are social animals; they tend to prefer groups over individuals, especially when it's in their interest to be part of a given group. Anarcho-capitalism is utterly lawless, so people are allowed to do whatever they want, including form organizations.

Sorry, but if it ain't governed, it's anarcho-capitalism. Anarcho-capitalism allows any voluntary associations.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
243,800
Reaction score
73,365
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
ARGH! You ignore the point made in the OP. What if you don't want to be part of the commune? Do they allow you freedom, or do they line you up against the wall and POP! goes the weasel?

Labels exist for a reason. If things and concepts don't have the attributes we ascribe to them, then the labels are inaccurate and ought to be altered. There's nothing wrong with labels that are accurate.

Hmm...government. I see. Anarcho-communist government. Sorry, that just doesn't work.

Anarcho-capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


If that's how you define anarcho-capitalism, then anarcho-capitalism is a human impossibility. Humans are social animals; they tend to prefer groups over individuals, especially when it's in their interest to be part of a given group. Anarcho-capitalism is utterly lawless, so people are allowed to do whatever they want, including form organizations.

Sorry, but if it ain't governed, it's anarcho-capitalism. Anarcho-capitalism allows any voluntary associations.
Being sort of an anarchist I tend to rebel being forced into compliance by OPs
 

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Labels exist for a reason. If things and concepts don't have the attributes we ascribe to them, then the labels are inaccurate and ought to be altered. There's nothing wrong with labels that are accurate.
Except labels are often used to make political attacks rather than promote accuracy, which you have proved by your very actions in this thread.

Hmm...government. I see. Anarcho-communist government. Sorry, that just doesn't work.
Neither does Anarcho-capitalism, yet you don't seem to hold it to the same standard. Capitalism doesn't exist without a government to provide basic protections against theft, fraud and violence. The market economy was developed long after the state.

If that's how you define anarcho-capitalism, then anarcho-capitalism is a human impossibility. Humans are social animals; they tend to prefer groups over individuals, especially when it's in their interest to be part of a given group. Anarcho-capitalism is utterly lawless, so people are allowed to do whatever they want, including form organizations.
And those organizations with complete and utter inevitably end up using coercive power form some kind of legal system.

Sorry, but if it ain't governed, it's anarcho-capitalism. Anarcho-capitalism allows any voluntary associations.
Including bandits, warlords and con artists, who prevent capitalism from actually functioning.
 
Last edited:

Black_Zawisza

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
606
Reaction score
259
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Being sort of an anarchist I tend to rebel being forced into compliance by OPs
Nobody's forcing you to do anything. However, should you refuse to address my primary argument in any way, shape, or form, I will logically assume you are incapable of countering it.

Except labels are often used to make political attacks rather than promote accuracy, which you have proved by your very actions in this thread.
Political attacks are fine if they're backed up with facts. And mine is. I repeat, until someone counters my argument successfully, I will assume it's impossible to do so.

Neither does Anarcho-capitalism, yet you don't seem to hold it to the same standard. Capitalism doesn't exist without a government to provide basic protections against theft, fraud and violence. The market economy was developed long after the state.
Ha. BS. Who says capitalism doesn't exist without government? What's your rationale for saying that?

...

...right. Baseless statement. yawns

And those organizations with complete and utter inevitably end up using coercive power form some kind of legal system.
Interesting. Why do you think it's inevitable? Point to historical record, if you please.

...

...still waiting.

Including bandits, warlords and con artists, who prevent capitalism from actually functioning.
For the third time, says WHO?!

...

...

...
 
Last edited:

spud_meister

Veni, vidi, dormivi!
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
36,113
Reaction score
21,519
Location
Didjabringabeeralong
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
an anarcho-commune would be an assembly of like minded individuals, so of course they wouldn't force people into it, one thing all the commies so far have yet to realise, you can't force people into communism, it should be based upon altruism.

i don't see how not forcing people into it makes it capitalistic.
 

Black_Zawisza

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
606
Reaction score
259
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
an anarcho-commune would be an assembly of like minded individuals, so of course they wouldn't force people into it, one thing all the commies so far have yet to realise, you can't force people into communism, it should be based upon altruism.

i don't see how not forcing people into it makes it capitalistic.
Without a government or a commune to restrict you, there are no regulations. And an unregulated economic system + private property = capitalism.
 
Last edited:

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Political attacks are fine if they're backed up with facts. And mine is. I repeat, until someone counters my argument successfully, I will assume it's impossible to do so.
By technical definitions, both anarcho communism and anarcho-capitalism both don't work. Communism and capitalism alike both require some coercive entity acting as the government in order function.

Ha. BS. Who says capitalism doesn't exist without government? What's your rationale for saying that?
Capitalism doesn't work if fraud, theft and violence can be used to gain a competitive advantage rather than honest work.

Interesting. Why do you think it's inevitable? Point to historical record, if you please.
There are no functioning market economies that have ever arisen without the backing and protections of a state.

For the third time, says WHO?!
Says me. If you look at all the anarchist societies throughout human history, none of them had market economies.
 

spud_meister

Veni, vidi, dormivi!
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
36,113
Reaction score
21,519
Location
Didjabringabeeralong
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
Without a government or a commune to restrict you, there are no regulations. And an unregulated economic system is capitalistic by default.
so the context for your commune in this situation is that everyone in it is forced into it, i presume, in which case you are correct, but if people are in the commune willingly then it is not capitalistic.
 

Orion

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,083
Reaction score
3,918
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It's not an oxymoron because socialism's natural goal is to lead to communism, which means no government. No government equals anarchy. Anarchos tend to distinguish themselves by noting that all communist regimes we have seen in modern history are not true examples of communism.
 

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,596
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I dont its its oxymoronic in the sense that Anarcho-Communists allow for de-association and are against using the guns of the state. At least if Im reading the wiki article correctly.
 

Anarcho-fascist

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
Messages
1,069
Reaction score
264
Location
T E X A S !
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Note: I am not really an anarchist or a fascist, my username is purposefully oxymoronic (bet you couldn't tell). ;)

Communism and Anarchism share some of their philosophy and some of their history with each other. The "First International" contained members from both groups, but certain differences of opinion caused them to split. I say it isn't necessarily an oxymoron.
 
Last edited:

d0gbreath

Yellow Dog Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
14,021
Reaction score
4,081
Location
Denton, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Without a government or a commune to restrict you, there are no regulations. And an unregulated economic system + private property = capitalism.
Without government there wouldn't be much private property. Only those with a financial security capable of hiring a squad of armed guards would retain their private property. Most of the other people would have to give theirs away to their own personal assailants. It's not like the police are going to work for free.

Anarchy = no rulers. Communism has always had rulers.

Oxymoron? Yes.
 

stinagen

New member
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
37
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
OK as i am a anarcho communist let me lay how most of my comrades view it (yes i used comrade its not a communist thing)
the root ideals of communism are a classless society and class often being caused by money (i separate communism and Marxism as the USSR China and other country are never truly communistic they create a "new class")
root ideals of anarchy no government no authority Manny anarchists view money as authority as money causes classes
most anarchist also have issues with globalization and would denounce any massive economic structure
the idea is for people to produce what they can and receive what they need with out a state
the idea is that people can make it happen with out a government individuals produce factories with out bosses
get the idea? they match pretty well
so its the ideals of communism with out the government quite simply
 

Agent Ferris

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
4,324
Reaction score
915
Location
Past the edge of the universe, through the singula
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Political labels are fairly arbitrary and tend to twisted in agenda's, so taking the literal meaning is rarely useful. Anarcho-Communism actually existed in parts of Republican Spain for a brief period, although it was crushed by Fascism rather quickly. The anarchists primary consisted of various trade unions and worker owned enterprises.

Confederación Nacional del Trabajo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As if trade unions didn't have centralized leadership. :roll: Anyways, the individual has the right to self ownership meaning that he has full and exclusive rights to his body and all goods and services produced by that body, that right can not exist within a collectivist society and thus collectivism of any sort and anarchy are mutually exclusive concepts because collectivism can not function without compulsion by force.
 
Last edited:

Agent Ferris

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
4,324
Reaction score
915
Location
Past the edge of the universe, through the singula
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
OK as i am a anarcho communist let me lay how most of my comrades view it (yes i used comrade its not a communist thing)
the root ideals of communism are a classless society and class often being caused by money (i separate communism and Marxism as the USSR China and other country are never truly communistic they create a "new class")
root ideals of anarchy no government no authority Manny anarchists view money as authority as money causes classes
most anarchist also have issues with globalization and would denounce any massive economic structure
the idea is for people to produce what they can and receive what they need with out a state
the idea is that people can make it happen with out a government individuals produce factories with out bosses
get the idea? they match pretty well
so its the ideals of communism with out the government quite simply
You can't have a functioning communist society without denying to the individual their right to self ownership.
 

stinagen

New member
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
37
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
You can't have a functioning communist society without denying to the individual their right to self ownership.
Well anarcho-communism is not communism it is simply anarchy with communistic properties
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
uh...Communism is a stateless society lacking government. Anarchy is no government.

Therefore, the two are not contradictory. This also proves there are no actual Communists in history as every so called Communist (except for small groups in the Andes and African Jungle) has always been state centered.
 

Agent Ferris

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
4,324
Reaction score
915
Location
Past the edge of the universe, through the singula
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
uh...Communism is a stateless society lacking government. Anarchy is no government.

Therefore, the two are not contradictory. This also proves there are no actual Communists in history as every so called Communist (except for small groups in the Andes and African Jungle) has always been state centered.
Nothing in the definition of Communism implies a stateless society, I know Marx mentioned the withering away of the state, but mentioned it only once, only in passing, and never explained why it would come to be. Marx adamantly argued for the dictatorship of the proletariat to achieve a classless society, he not only wasn't an anarchist but a devout statist:

The first step on the path to the workers' revolution is the elevation of the proletariat to the position of ruling class. The proletariat will gain from its political domination by gradually tearing away from the bourgeoisie all capital, by centralizing all means of production in the hands of the State, that is to say in the hands of the proletariat itself organized as the ruling class. -- Communist Manifesto

Furthermore; Engles who coauthored the Communist Manifesto not only promoted the state but promoted state terror:


“...And the victorious party” (in a revolution) “must maintain its rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionaries. Would the Paris Commune have lasted more than a day if it had not used the authority of the armed people against the bourgeoisie? Cannot we, on the contrary, blame it for having made too little use of that authority?..."

-- Engels
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom