Communism/Marxism

Hammer and sickle in user name moment. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Dispropaganda (@Dispropoganda) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Voegelin, Eric wrote:

Again, the determination of this area of agreement will permit us to fix the point at which Marx departs from Bakunin. Marx does not share the primordial lust of destruction with his rival, nor the absence of any idea of order. He is willing to guide the revolution by providing it with a “scientific” system of social theory and a “philosophy” of history. In this respect, the organizing will of Marx, his dictatorial intellectualism, is related to that of Comte. Bakunin, on the other hand, heartily detests both Marx and Comte because their "authoritarianism" would limit his lusty passion for destruction by visions of responsible, ordering action. Moreover, Marx goes beyond Bakunin in defining the, proletariat as the specific agent of the revolution instead of the vague "poor classes”, “masses” and “real people.” In the 1860’s, when Marx is engaged in laying the groundwork for an international organization of the proletariat, Bakunin still indulges in romantic pamphlets glorifying the Russian robber. Nevertheless, while at the end of their lives the scientistic, authoritarian socialism of Marx and the anarchistic revolutionary existence of Bakunin have moved far apart, we should be aware of the common beginnings. The Marxian line of revolution was successful because of the elements that were missing in Bakunin, but the system of Marx would never have been written and never exerted its influence unless it had originated in the genuine pathos of revolutionary existence that we find in its purity in Bakunin.

[From Enlightenment to Revolution]