That’s not what I was implying, historically “Communist” has been used for Marxists. Anarcho-Communism is only one type of Anarchist, there are Anarcho-Syndicalists, Anarcho-Primitivists, etc, meanwhile Marxism is always Communist.
Anarchists and Marxists do want different end-results, Anarchists want full decentralization and Marxists want full centralization and democratization, but are aligned in opposition to Capitalism and Imperialism and wish to create a more just and equitable society for all.
Well, if you mean genuine marxists, then yes. But many non-marxist, non-communist groups call themselves marxists, such as Stalinists, who argue for Socialism In One Country against Marx’s advice. You’ve got to look out for those.
Socialism in One Country isn’t against Marx at all. The argument between Socialism in One Country and Permanent Revolution was whether it was worth building up Socialism while also supporting global revolution, or devote all resources to global revolution and give up on Socialism until then. Permanent Revolution ended up being generally wrong, and depended on the Peasantry being incapable of genuine alliance with the Proletariat, which was wrong.
Genuinely, what do you think Socialism in One Country means to where it goes against Marx? Communism must be global, but Socialism begins with the Proletariat taking control.
Removed by mod
That’s not what I was implying, historically “Communist” has been used for Marxists. Anarcho-Communism is only one type of Anarchist, there are Anarcho-Syndicalists, Anarcho-Primitivists, etc, meanwhile Marxism is always Communist.
Anarchists and Marxists do want different end-results, Anarchists want full decentralization and Marxists want full centralization and democratization, but are aligned in opposition to Capitalism and Imperialism and wish to create a more just and equitable society for all.
Well, if you mean genuine marxists, then yes. But many non-marxist, non-communist groups call themselves marxists, such as Stalinists, who argue for Socialism In One Country against Marx’s advice. You’ve got to look out for those.
Socialism in One Country isn’t against Marx at all. The argument between Socialism in One Country and Permanent Revolution was whether it was worth building up Socialism while also supporting global revolution, or devote all resources to global revolution and give up on Socialism until then. Permanent Revolution ended up being generally wrong, and depended on the Peasantry being incapable of genuine alliance with the Proletariat, which was wrong.
Genuinely, what do you think Socialism in One Country means to where it goes against Marx? Communism must be global, but Socialism begins with the Proletariat taking control.