💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › huang-lingshuang-critique-of-marxism.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 10:47:43. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Critique of Marxism
Author: Huang Lingshuang
Date: May 1919
Language: en
Topics: Chinese Anarchism, Marxism, critique, China
Source: From Robert Graham (Ed.), Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas; Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300 CE to 1939). https://libcom.org/library/anarchism-documentary-history-libertarian-ideas-volume-1-2

Huang Lingshuang

Critique of Marxism

Marx’s idea of politics can be found in ‘The Communist Manifesto,”

coauthored with Engels (there was confrontation in the International

Working Men’s Association between Marx and Bakunin, an anarchist.

Actually, Marx’s idea of communism is the contemporary idea of

collectivism, while Bakunin’s idea of collectivism is the contemporary

idea of communism). In the Manifesto there are ten measures, which can

be seen as the policies of social democracy. What are these policies all

about?

of the state;

The most severe criticism of these policies came from anarchists, whose

communism is quite different from Marx’s collectivism. Anarchists

believe that in a historical perspective the state is organized solely

for the protection of the privileges and property of the few. By now all

the power of education, state religion and national defence has been

concentrated in the hands of the state. If we endow the state with more

power, such as control of the land, mines, railways, banks, insurance,

will the tyranny of the state be even harsher (these are Kropotkin’s

words in the Encyclopedia Britannica)? Can we guarantee that our leaders

will not become a Napoleon or a Yuan Shikai [Chinese strongman]?

Moreover, socialism should not be the suppression of individual freedom.

The government of the social democratic party wants to establish

industrial armies and agricultural armies. Isn’t this a suppression of

the individual? There are also some problems in their principle of

distribution. Society is different from an individual. In the light of

socialism, the possessions of society should belong to the public rather

than to the individual. According to Marx’s idea of collectivism,

things, such as houses and clothes, may be privately owned. I believe

that private ownership of property is contradictory to the principle of

socialism. Is it problematic if in the same house the cattle-shed is

public property while the bedrooms are privately owned? Moreover, the

Marxists advocate to each according to his capacity. If so, men of

strong ability would enjoy rewards while men of poor ability would lose

their means of living. Poor ability is caused by one’s physiological

condition. This does not result from his laziness. Such a method of

distribution has nothing to do with human happiness. Anarchist

communists want to subvert the organization of the state and allow the

common people to establish a variety of associations to run enterprises,

such as educational associations and agricultural associations. Step by

step these associations will become complex enough to deal with all

business in society so as to abolish all kinds of authoritarian power

and bring equality and happiness to every individual. Their principle of

labour is “from each according to his capacity,” and their principle of

distribution is “to each according to his needs.” This is the focus of

the difference between anarchists and Marxists.