What are some good resources I could read to inform myself on the Anarchist/Anarcho-Communist definition of "Authority"? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/anarchism@lemmy.ml

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/54566460

Books, pamphlets, manifestos, you name it/whatever. Please just leave out terminally online "bread"tubers, thank you.

Ideally from a few reputable Anarchist to get a better picture. The literature doesn't have to be exclusively about authority, but should mention it in relative detail.

Edit: Since I rightfully got called out on the following sentence in another thread as being demeaning of online educators work

Please just leave out terminally online "bread"tubers, thank you.

I should maybe clarify that I meant people like Contrapoints who have delightfully little to do with any kind of leftistm, let alone Anarchism

top 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 9 points 5 days ago

Not an anarchist anymore, but from back when I was, I know that there are a number of anarchist critiques of Engels' On Authority. This is where you'll find a lot of contemporary anarchist thought on the concept of authority as a deliberate counter to Marxism.

Of course, it goes without saying, I disagree with these critiques, but if you want to expand your knowledge of leftist theory in general, Read On Authority seems to be one of the more popular critiques of Engels from anarchists, and the Anarchist FAQ in general is probably the single-most comprehensive source for beginners to anarchism today.

[-] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Thanks for the suggestions!

I have read "On Authority" like ages ago and only remember that it wasn't one of Engels' best works and the general "nor engaging in good faith".
Do you maybe know of a better Marxist critiques of those critiques or an alternative text to "On Authority", maybe a bit more modern?

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

To be clear, I think On Authority holds up. Anarchism is more amorphous than Marxist tendencies are, by intention, so On Authority actually does end up countering a lot of anarchists. There isn't "one definition of authority" for anarchists, just a general trend against it, and many definitions. Some anarchists seek full horizontalism, some allow "justifiable hierarchy," some want syndicalism, etc.

The biggest counter to anarchism, and what really started my path to Marxism in earnest, was Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, which I consider critical reading. If you want something more modern, though, I'm a big fan of Nia Frome's work. Of particular relevance here is On the Abolition/Preservation of the State, but Frome has other excellent essays and none of them are overly long in my opinion.

[-] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

With the exception of "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific" (which I read as a teen, but in a way more akin to how you read a novel and not really in a scientific manner), I haven't heard of the other works you mentioned. Will look into them too.

"Scientifically" re-reading the classics and then expanding into stuff I haven't read yet is definitely on my "priority Todo", I really should get around to it.
(I haven't gotten around to it for years, the brainfog and all the other baggage ain't helpin')

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 days ago

I know what you mean! I'll probably read through the r/TheDeprogram Study Guide after the Capital volume 1-3 reading threads finish later this year, and adjust my own reading list as well. I like to reread the classics, I think I've read Socialism: Utopian and Scientific 4 times by this point.

[-] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 days ago

From the Deprogram Reading List thread:

Nice list! Just a warning about “Marxism Today” – the linked videos are probably fine, but I’d be very critical about his ultraleftist takes on AES countries like China

Reads like an endorsement; coming form a grad admin and all :p /lh /hj

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 days ago

Being honest, I agree with the Grad admin, I'm pretty pro-China and pro-AES. There's a difference between what I would consider to be good, Marxist critique, and ultraleftism, which is what Marxism Today falls under. A lot of his videos are pretty good, but the MLM perspective does result in some idealist critique that reveals itself to be inadequate the longer we observe China's trajectory.

[-] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I – in turn – tend to agree with excluding the modern-day PRC from AES/state socialism and do think something akin to "bourgeois state of a new type" is an adequate categorisation ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Also calling Maoists ultras/idealist 💀

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I'm aware we disagree here, and I'm not trying to derail. I'm okay with disagreeing.

For the PRC, public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy, and governs the large firms and key industries. The working class is steadily advancing in material conditions, and as production develops it is increasingly planned. A bourgeois state would not allow capital to be so constrained and boxed in, and at the same time a state cannot be anything other than an extension of the ruling class. In China, this class has been the working class since the revolution, and it is backed up by the fact that the CPC is supported by over 90% of the population.

Perceptions of democracy index

The PRC certainly isn't much farther than the primary stage of socialism, as they call it, but already aspects of the intermediate stage are appearing. Reality more closely aligns with the CPC's stated goals and strategies than it does their critics, which is why most ML orgs back China and consider it socialist right now.

Cheng Enfu's stages of socialism diagram

As for Maoists, I don't mean Mao specifically. Mao was a Marxist-Leninist, and his contributions to China and its developments in socialism have been critical. Mao is one of history's most important Marxist-Leninists. However, I disagree with the univeralsality of strategies like the cultural revolution, protracted people's war, and so forth, while Maoists see them as universal to every revolution. Maoists tend to come to the conclusion that revolution is impossible in the global north, which just ends up pushing responsibility onto the global south. That's why I consider Maoists to be ultraleftists, not just anyone that supports Mao and upholds Mao's contributions to Chinese socialism (also called Marxism-Leninism Mao Zedong Thought), which I am fully in support of.

Just figured I'd elaborate a bit, you don't have to respond.

[-] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 days ago

Didn't mean to sound confrontational, thanks for the response nonetheless <3

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 days ago

No worries! I feel like if there's disagreement, then it's only fair that I give my honest and clear justifications for what I believe, the other party can decide what they wish from there. You weren't confrontational, IMO, it's more that I responded the way I do to pretty much any disagreement for the sake of open discussion and transparency.

this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025

20 points (100.0% liked)

Anarchism

3456 readers

1 users here now

Are you an Anarchist? The answer might surprise you!

Rules: 0. Post content that is thoughtful and relevant to social liberation from an anarchist, autonomous, antifascist perspective.

Be respectful
Don't be a nazi
Argue about the point and not the person
This is not the place to debate the merits of anarchism itself. While discussion is encouraged, getting in your “epic dunks on the anarkiddies” is not. As a result of the instance’s poor moderation policies and hostility toward anarchists by default, lemmygrad users are encouraged not to post here, though not explicitly disallowed if they aren’t just looking to start a fight.