Marxist and Anarchist Theories

Marxist and Anarchist Theories

Introduction

The provisions of anarchist and Marxist theories are closely similar. The theories advocate for equality founded on a classless and stateless society. The two theories show indistinguishable unity since they participate in the movement against inequality and oppression in all forms. In this regard, most people who undergo radicalization become sympathetic and subscribe to the two theories. The division between anarchism and Marxism stems from a clear difference in universal principles. Schism, which mainly stemmed from the centralized governance structure of the Bolshevik revolution in the 19th century, defined the relationship between Marxism and anarchism. Despite the evident unity of the two theories towards the liberation of humanity, Marxism depicts a particular and adorable route for historical analysis and the development of scientific methods that improve the quality of governance and an understanding of society by the working class that can facilitate positive change.

The Difference between Marxism and Anarchism

Anarchism is a weak theory that contains contradicting ideas and principles unlike Marxism that curves a clear path on the utilization of resources, governance, and the position of state in the society. A critical look at the anarchist theory reveals that it contains various theories borrowed from utopian socialists, especially Proudhon and Bakunin (Knight, 2012). Karl Max described Proudhon ideas as philosophically absurd because they are inconsistent with the modern social conditions. Max noted that the main theoretical weakness that anarchism repeats the mistakes of the utopian society particularly the exponent of bourgeois socialism. Towards this end, anarchism and Marxism seem opposed, meaning that they are mutually exclusive ideas. The later comes out as a scientific theory that guides revolutionary ideas that reflect the class interest of the proletariat and not the bourgeoisie. The basis of the Marxist ideas is the working class, which forms the main revolutionary class within the society. On the other hand, anarchism is an unscientific theory that is founded on the bourgeoisie.

Marxism advocates for spontaneity and active indulgence in politics while anarchism seems to oppose that that mantra. As mentioned earlier, anarchism draws its principles from the works of Proudhon and Bakunin, which seem to reject politics and political parties. Bakunin is refused to advocate for political revolutions, which means that he denied any revolution whose objective is to establish a different political order. Instead, Bakunin was a proponent of social revolutions (Bakunin, 1953). The aim of the social revolutions is to do away with classes and promptly establish an anarchist society that is stateless, no oppressors, oppressed, and is stateless. Anarchism further states that anything that falls short of social revolution is reformism that should face opposition form the members of the society. An interpretation of such an ideology would naturally translate into opposition of struggle for democracy, better working conditions, and advocacy for better wages by workers should face oppositions and subsequent rejection because they do not constitute immediate replacement of state and the an instant overthrow of government. On the other hand, Marxism advocates for other struggles that go beyond social struggles, meaning that it has a wider scope in comparison. Therefore, the Marxists idea encompasses struggle for reforms in various fields such as education, health, minority right, and better worker remuneration, which are not entailed in the anarchist ideology.

The anarchist philosophy is reminiscent to an extremist ideology which only considers the opposite end of the society while Marxism considers every member of society in the struggle for better conditions and democratic space. The anarchist theory attempts mainly to appraise the confined nature of the bourgeoisie democracy then moves over to the other extreme which is the poor within the society, thereby ignoring the middle and working class. Anarchism seems illogical since it points out that mainly the state power, and not class, that causes betrayal and oppression to the masses. According to the theory, merely holding an office, regardless of the context, automatically turns one into an oppressor. Moreover, it rejects participation into electoral processes. It is worth noting that the working class struggled for decades to earn the right to vote and faced resistance from the ruling class. The real struggle lies in the form of representative democracy, but the economic power wielded by the bourgeoisie over the ruling system such as parliament. Marxism seems comprehensive because it considers the fact that the struggle is not merely political but also encompasses social and economic spheres.

The Principles of Marxism

Karl Max perceived the state as an instrument of exploitation, which is in full control of the ruling class, meaning that there should be room for emancipation. Once the state is left for the economically dominant class, the masses are bound to suffer and live in unbearable political, social, and economic conditions. According to Marxism, every state is imposed by extra-legal and extra-moral forces, meaning that force is the driving force behind the formation and maintenance of state. Furthermore, Marx acknowledged that the state is dictatorship by the masses. Therefore, the basic unit of change is the social classes, which are solely defined by the role they play in the production process. The theory of state stipulates that there is always the ruling class and the other classes that are rules. The society and class relations are the main impediments for the continued creation of development of productive forces. There is need to overcome the prevailing class for the others to realize economic and political progress. It means that the radical alteration of ideological, cultural, and political processes would almost guarantee a good governance system that is free of oppression.

The Marxist theory is relevant because it aims at establishing a political system complete with the tenets of democracy, universal suffrage, and economic empowerment to deter exploitation and oppression by a single class. The aim was to deter oppression, meaning that Marx was the first individual to envision the possible existence of checks and balances that would keep the government and the state in check to ensure that it deliver the services to the people. The Marxist theory acknowledged the role played by the state in the economic front, which is the most powerful principle to prevent or improve the degree of control on the masses (MacKinnon, 2018). The separation of power, which is a fundamental pillar of democracy, is an idea borrowed from the Marxist theory. In essence, the existence of judiciary, the executive, and legislature, which is the formation of current governments in the world, stems from the Marxist ideology.

Conclusion

Marxist and anarchist ideologies advocate for governance and the existence of the state without oppression, meaning that they both advocate for the formation of progressive states. Nevertheless, Marxism is more comprehensive and practicable even by the contemporary standards. While anarchist ideology stands for social revolution, Marxists ideology stands for a comprehensive approach to governance that goes beyond social and political reforms. The Marxist theory enlightens the masses to advocate for accountable and democratic processes not only in the political spheres but in the places of work. It encourages the people to pursue economic equality, better working conditions, and improved health care. While social reforms are good, the other spheres of society such as political governance and the economic composition of the classes play a big role in determining the composition of the state and the level of governance.