Imagine two revolutionary minds in the 19th century debating over the best way to change the world. That's what happened when Karl Marx, the father of communism, and anarchists like Mikhail Bakunin found themselves at intellectual odds. In the midst of a rapidly industrializing Europe, where poverty and inequality were rampant, these thinkers sought to reshape society. But while Marx advocated for a structured class revolution leading to a socialist state, anarchists wanted a stateless society without hierarchies. Their conflict became a central theme in the First International, the International Workingmen's Association, in the 1860s.
Marx was a philosopher and economist with a plan rooted firmly in the idea of historical materialism. He envisioned a workers' revolution that would smash existing class structures and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat. This new state, as per Marx’s theory, would eventually wither away, leading to a classless society. His ideas were radical but also centered around a structured, step-by-step process that's often associated with calculated patience.
Anarchists, however, were wary of any form of state—even a provisional socialist one. Mikhail Bakunin, a prominent anarchist figure, believed that any form of government would result in oppression. He argued that true freedom comes from the destruction of the state and spontaneous organization from below. Anarchists wanted direct action and immediate demolition of state structures, leading to a society where people govern themselves through free associations.
The clash between Marx and Bakunin exemplifies the broader debate on how authority and power should be structured, or if they should exist at all. Their differences came to a head during the First International, a coalition established to unite various working-class movements across the globe. Marx's influence led to a more centralized direction for the association, while Bakunin pushed for a decentralized federation of members. This led to Bakunin’s expulsion in 1872, solidifying the split between Marxist socialism and anarchist thought.
Both Marxism and anarchism agree on several points. They both critique the exploitative nature of capitalism and aspire for a society where people are not divided by class or ruled by oppressive institutions. They both emerged as responses to the harsh conditions of the Industrial Revolution and the gaping disparities of wealth and power it entailed. However, their methods to achieve these goals could not be more different.
Marxists and anarchists today still share a critical standpoint against neoliberal policies and authoritarian regimes. However, disagreements over strategy and the role of the state remain. In contemporary times, movements like the Occupy Wall Street or the rise of Antifa have echoed anarchist sentiments of horizontalism and leaderless resistance, which often stray from the more structured Marxist perspectives predominant in parties like the old-style Communist parties.
Some say that Marx underestimated the persistence of states and class distinctions, reflecting the anarchists' constant skepticism toward organized power. Others argue that anarchists were too idealistic in their denial of transitional structures, which are necessary to achieve any semblance of equality. The development of socialist states such as the Soviet Union, with its centralized control, illustrated both the potential and the flaws in Marxist theory, according to critics. Conversely, the effectiveness of anarchist principles is often relegated to micro or temporary movements that find survival challenging in a world dominated by structured powers.
While their rivalry might seem purely historical, the conflict between Marxism and anarchism continues to influence modern radical thinking. Gen Z, growing up in an era rife with inequality, climate crises, and institutional failure, may find value in exploring these contrasting philosophies. Anarchism's adaptability and immediacy appeal to the desire for instant change, while Marxism’s detailed structural analysis offers a guide for societal reform.
Understanding both perspectives enlightens us on the complexities of power and the challenges in achieving meaningful social change. The conversation is far from over, and in its pursuit, the battle between Karl Marx's structured revolution and Bakunin's stateless society keeps unfolding, urging each generation to question and redefine the paths to a just world.