Stephen Von Sychowski and Jason Mann
Communist Party of Canada
Prince George Collective
In the “anti-capitalist” movement there are many paths that can be followed. These include Marxism, Anarchism, and numerous reformist trends. Where is a person to place their loyalty? For what cause should one fight in order to overthrow the ruling class and create a better society?
Anarchism and the state
There are several key differences between Marxism and Anarchism. One of the key differences that separate the two movements more than any other is the question of the state. The Anarchist believe that the bourgeois (capitalist) state must be smashed completely, and replaced with a new, stateless society. They intend this to be done all in one massive sweep. All societies’ problems are to be solved and everyone will live happily ever after.
But the state itself is a tool of the class war between the bourgeoisie (capitalist ruling class) and the proletariat (the working class). The current state is a tool of the bourgeoisie for the suppression of the masses and the consolidation of bourgeois power. The proletariat state that Marxists wish to put in place after the overthrow of the bourgeois state serves the same purpose, only inversed. It means to consolidate the power of the masses by defeating those who formerly oppressed them. Its purpose is to end the class war, something that the bourgeois state could never achieve. The proletariat state will wither away as the power of the proletariat is consolidated. The result would be a classless and stateless society.
The Anarchists hope to abolish the state overnight; they believe that when the bourgeoisie is taken out of political power, the class war will be ended. But think of this, the proletariat is not currently in political power. Does this mean that the class war does not currently exist? Indeed it does not! So what reason have we to believe that the class war would be ended in an inversed situation? The immediate abolition of the state and the replacement of the state with a stateless society would mean that the bourgeoisie would be free to retake power, as there would be no force to counter their attempt. The bourgeoisie would still be in a position where it could take power and certainly exercise authority over the people. Therefore, the anti-authoritarian anarchist, who calls for the total abolition of the state and the replacement of it with a stateless society, actually is calling for the certain continuation of bourgeois rule. As well as the certain re-establishment of the bourgeois state because they reject the notion of the proletariats authority to defeat the bourgeoisie once and for all.
As Marxists, we believe in the abolition of the state, but only of the bourgeois state. This is to be replaced with a proletarian state (a socialist state). In other words, a dictatorship of the proletariat, this simply means the dictatorship of the oppressed majority over the bourgeois capitalist minority (the oppressors). The socialist state will break down the power of the capitalists, and as the power of the proletariat is consolidated, and the threat of bourgeois oppression is eliminated, the proletarian state becomes less and less necessary and gradually withers away. Eventually we are left with more-or-less what the Anarchists hope to achieve over-night. Marxism is built on the science of dialectics, not ideology.
Communism and anarchism are built also on different pillars. The anarchists are built on the pillar of the individual, communists of the masses. It is necessary to free the masses before one can free the individual. Freedom for individuals cannot occur when their class is oppressed. The proletariat is an ever growing class, growing day by day. Our strength lies in the proletariat, the growing army of the oppressed. After the anarchist has crushed the bourgeois state, how does he hope to make sure it does not resurface? The anarchist has no plan in this respect. The communist sees that it is the proletariat who will suppress the bourgeoisie with a workers state. With hopes vested in the proletariat revolution is inevitable. The important question must always be asked, does it benefit the working class. The question is not does it benefit the individual. This leads successful socialism. Socialism cannot be built on individuals; it must be built upon society.
The difference is that we are left with state-less society where there is no need for a state because there is no further class-antagonism. And no further threat of bourgeois power. Only this process is a viable solution for removing the bourgeoisie from power and creating a new society of true equality, justice and freedom for the world proletariat.
Reformism and the state
The differences between Marxism and Reformism in regards to the state are numerous. Reformist groups hope to come into power through means of the current political system, and to then simply use the current system for their own good. To reform it and to make it “nicer”. Reformists do not believe in the abolition of the bourgeois state. They simply believe in making it “more fair” so that the bourgeoisie and the proletariat can meet half way at a “far” conclusion. They fundamentally reject the notion of revolution because they fear the idea of real change. The Reformists are generally well supported by the bourgeoisie because Reformism gives small concessions to the proletariat, thereby making the ruling class seem reasonable, and reducing the drive for massive change. In this way, Reformism is the tool of the bourgeoisie whether it means to be or not.
Marxism rejects the notion that capitalism can be made into a fair system; no amount of small concessions can erase the fact that the core of capitalism is the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie for profit. Minor reforms may indeed improve the lifestyle of the proletariat to some degree, but can never free it from its chains. The notion of meeting the bourgeoisie half-way is simply another way of saying that we should surrender all hope of revolutionary action that will free the proletariat from the grip of its oppressors. Marxists do not reject the idea of using the current state apparatus to the best of their ability, to gain more power and to better the lives of the proletariat, but they reject the idea that it is the only form of struggle. Marxists realize that there must be a breaking point at which the struggle intensifies between the two sides of the class war. This will be the proletarian revolution when power will be seized from the bourgeoisie, and the bourgeois state is abolished. This is followed by the setting up of a proletarian state for the purpose of consolidating the power of the masses over their oppressors, and will gradually lead to the withering away of the state and finally a classless, stateless society. This is the key point that is rejected by the Reformists.
The following excerpt from Lenin's writings outlines, in simple form, the progression of demoacracy under the Marxist system.
I--in capitalist society,
a state in the proper sense of the word (the state is needed by the bourgeoisie)
II--the transition (dictatorship of the proletariat)
a state of the transitional type (not a state in the proper sense of the word)
III--communist society: the withering away of the (the state is not needed, it withers away)
state.
Continued on next page (click here)