this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
270 points (98.6% liked)
Memes of Production
1300 readers
1067 users here now
Seize the Memes of Production
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.
Other Great Communities:
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So communism is when council communism (understandable), anarchism (huh?) and german idealism (wtf)?
Lenin also has no right to be on the same side as people who took and bastardized his work.....
Anarchism is pretty compatible with Marxism. Marx defined communism as a classless stateless society, which is also the idea of anarchism.
Now I would argue that Lenin didn't act in the interest of Marx. He formed his vanguard party, that surpressed and killed political dissidents (anarchists for example), but curiously never gave the power back to the people. So he wasn't really a Marxist, he may have believed that, but in the end he was pretty much just a dictator in my opinion.
This is straight up nonsense, while anarchism and communism broadly share the same goals, they fundamentally oppose one another fundamentally (such as on DOTP, economy, power, etc.). There's an entire page of Marx & Engels texts attacking anarchism (which should indicate their compatibility), and I'd at least recommend reading The Poverty of Philosophy on the matter. There's also Lessons from the Counter-Revolution, Spain 1936 which isn't a critique of anarchism as a whole but does show how non-stalinist communists view anarchists in practice.
The entire second paragraph, though, completely misunderstands marxist theory. Too lazy to respond in detail myself rn, but Revolution Summed Up, specifically the 1917 part shows how Lenin and Bolsheviks were fully consistent with Marxism, and later parts make good arguments as to why counter-revolution took over (hint: it's not due to some anarchistic notion of "no power to the people").
This is such a classic tankie response. "I basically have no real arguments, but just read these 10 books about theory, trust me bro they agree with me".
That's exactly how my conspiracy minded friend argued with me back in the day: "Just trust me, I can't explain why you're wrong, but you have to watch this 2 hour Youtube video with me and then you'll understand why the earth is flat".
If you can't even give me real arguments that support your position you either haven't properly understood the literature you're talking about or are knowingly lying.
Ah piss off, you literally wrote an opinion that's just straight up wrong and directly contradicts Marx's own writings, and now you're getting angry that I didn't spend 100x more effort than you writing up some wall of text that nobody is going to read.
Sorry for the absolutely unreasonable suggestion to actually read and learn before acting like an expert on the topic.
Just so you know his argument was a good faith one. He posed his opinion then backed it up with actual first party documentation on the specific topic. Do you have any idea how hard that is to actually do in philosophy? The person should receive a legitimate physical award to sit on a shelf for making the first cogent researched argument ever posted on the internet. And I am only being hyperbolic about that last bit.
Anarchist communism has been the most common kind of anarchist thought throughout the years.
Also Lenin was an opportunist who killed communists because they opposed his counter revolutionary state.