This is a fairly ignorant question from me, as I know little of Anarchism, but what do Left-Anarchists think of Marxism...

This is a fairly ignorant question from me, as I know little of Anarchism, but what do Left-Anarchists think of Marxism? Are there massive disagreements?

As I understand it, marxism has done a lot as an analysis of capitalism that cannot be disregarded on the basis of statism. I saw this pic in another thread

one of the primary disagreements is the way of getting to communism. ancoms generally view marxist communism as increasing state power rather than trying to get rid of it, and prefer the outright abolition of all government. marxism instead favors the organization of the proletariat and people as a whole into a new structure of government and a society where class distinctions have been broken down and lead to the withering of the state, since the marxist idea of the state is as a tool of class oppression/power manifestation which obviously can't exist without classes, and the "stateless" society will be organically self governing with the settling in of the structures developed and refined in the transitory dictatorship of the proletariat.

anarchists were pretty woke on the jewish question

*autistic screeching*: the quote

*predicting the failure of the USSR in 1800s* the quote

(You)

Firstly all anarchism is socialist, as such a "right-anarchism" is as oxymoronic as "socialist capitalism" or "attractive stormcuck". With that out of the way your question is difficult to answer because not only are anarchists not a monolith but Marxism ranges from Marx to Dauve to Hoxha. Personally as an anarchist I find much of Marx's work useful and appreciate the work of leftcoms like Dauve, while I don't particularly like ML and derivatives or Trotskyism.

Yes, fundamentally on the definition of state and praxis. Communization has both anarchist and marxist currents so you might be interested in looming into that

guessing by "left" anarchists you mean the more collective tendences as opposed to individualist tendencies.

Marx was a breddy cool dude; the only areas most anarchists (I think) really disagree with Marx is on the definition of the state and whether it should be kept around at all after the revolution (the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat as a state, the consequent withering away of the state etc. - anarchists say no) plus the idea of a transitional stage between capitalism and communism (most anarchists say no to this too, though I've seen some people advocate for an-collectivism with labour vouchers as a precursor to communism).

Communisation as part of a spontaneous revolution is probably where it's at for the future though, in terms of the "real movement". M-L has had its day and now it's kinda inextricably linked with "bad" things in popular thought.

My only real complaint about Marx is that he kicked out the anarchist faction from the international.

So much for left unity.

As an ancom myself I find Marx's work to be essential. His critiques of capitalism are fundamental.

Largely I think disagreement between Marxists and Ancoms is largely semantics, as the concept of the DotP creates a lot of problems for anarchists. I personally think some level of vanguardism would be acceptable in regard to revolution, however I question how much power this vanguard should have, do not think it should capture the state apparatus in any way, and think it would need to be very much so democratic and nonheirarchial.
This will vary between those in the anarchist tendency, so I wouldn't be surprised if some disagree with me. But yea I think largely Marxism can be congruent with ancom philosophy. And to reiterate what others have said, both Marxism and Ancom share the same goal, a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society. There is just a bit of disagreement over how to get there.

Bakunin was rightfully banned after refusing to self-crit

Anarchists are usually fairly Marxist. Only recently have the Bookchinites (i.e. fervently anti-marxist """anarchists""") started to become more prominent in anarchist circles.

That picture is dumb as shit
The relevance of Marx is not that he is some kind of a Leonardo, a Great Man with an endlessly creative fountain of original thought.
He is so famous and notable precisely because he formed the synthesis between a great many earlier and contemporary ideas, especially those of the utopian socialists and the tradition of British economists.

Any anarkiddy who unironically spouts such shit has to get out.

That's wrong though. I am an attractive storm fag.

Your mother told you that to make you feel better about your self

There are some disagreements as listed in the thread but some anarchists have tried to incorporate Marxist ideas into Anarchism like David Guerin and David Graeber.

I consider myself on the libertarian side of the socialist spectrum, but I think it's pretty easy to admit that Marx still has the most comprehensive ideas and is the most important theorist in history.

When it's blaming economic system I see no problem with marxism
When it gets into segregating people into reified "classes" it goes too far into ideology to treat it seriously

...

marx is pretty cool he critiqued political economy and didnt afraid of anything

"marxists" on the other hand…

this is the most ridiculous nonsense i may have ever seen on this horrible website

anarchists really are just petty-bourg ideologues under the disguise of leftism, aren't they? i mean my fucking god, this idiot is basically operating under the paradigm of fucking INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY in regards to philosophical ideas via his accusation of marx "stealing" parts of his theory, as if philosophy from its outset hasn't always fundamentally been a process of thinkers borrowing and revising the ideas of their contemporaries. this man is unironically applying the notion of private property to philosophical thought. disgusting.

this isn't even getting into the specifics of this utter fucking TRASH HEAP.

i dont even know where to begin. did marx not begin as a member of the fucking young hegelians? did marx not remain faithful to dialectical logic throughout all of his writings (even his early work, when it was less refined)? marx has always been, and he would be the first to admit this, a category of hegel more than anything else.


i wont continue because im arguing at a picture on the internet, but anyone that reads this and takes a lick of it serious is a moron

what banking speculation was there in the USSR?