Difference Between Communism and Marxism
Communism vs Marxism
Is there any difference between communism and Marxism? Well, the two ‘“ communism and Marxism ‘“ are the same with not much difference between the two. Communism is really based on Marxism and the two cannot be separated. However, one can see that Marxism is the theory and Communism is the practical implementation of Marxism.
Communism is the realisation of a Stateless society where all are equal. On the other hand Marxism is the framework by which such a state is developed. While Marxism is a political ideology based on Karl Marx’s ideas, communism can be called as a political system, which is based on Marxist ideology.
Marxism is a system that analysis the different aspects of a state where there exists no difference between the rich and the poor. And Communism can be termed as a political system where all become one and the same. Communism aims at establishing a class less, egalitarian and stateless society based on common ownership, which promotes equality and fairness.
Marxism is a philosophy, which bases itself on the materialist interpretation of history. It says that history was driven by the materialistic approach of the people, which means the life of a person was driven by what he needed to survive. The Marxist ideology is to prepare the society for communism.
Marxism views that just as society transformed from feudalism to capitalism, it would transform itself to socialism and eventually to communism. Well, the method by which the transformation takes place is what differentiates the communists from Marxists. The Communists believe that the transformation will take place through revolutionary means.
It is hard to make out a difference between Communism and Marxism. These two are so closely related that it is hard to make a distinction between the two. Communism would not have born without Marxism. Last of all, it can be said that Marxism is the theory and communism is the actual practise.
Summary
1.Marxism is the theory and Communism is the practical implementation of Marxism.
2. Communism is the realisation of a Stateless society where all are equal. On the other hand Marxism is the framework by which such a state is developed.
3.Marxism is a political ideology based on Karl Marx’s ideas, communism can be called as a political system, which is based on Marxist ideology.
4.The Marxist ideology is to prepare the society for communism.
- Difference Between CNBC and Fox Business - October 3, 2011
- Difference Between Distilled Water and Boiled Water - September 30, 2011
- Difference Between McDonalds and Burger King - September 30, 2011
Search DifferenceBetween.net :
Email This Post
: If you like this article or our site. Please spread the word. Share it with your friends/family.
Please stop promoting the misquote “Communism is the realisation of a Stateless society where all are equal” which is often used as the biggest flaw in Marxism; the actual quote is “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Not quite the same.
It is perfectly obvious that your article is written to appear fair and unbiased, but anybody with a little intelligence can see it is a condemnation of Marxism and Communism, veiled in an ‘explanation’ of why they are the same, as you tend to keep repeating.
And the contradictory nature of his wording. Somehow Marxim, the “theory,” becomes the framework by which Communism is implemented though Communism is the implementation of the theory of Marxism, at least according to the author. That gave me a good chuckle.
The only contradiction here is going on in your own brain. How’s that for something to chuckle about?
You’re desperate to see fault where there is none. Your charge is so baseless that I’m left uncertain your comment is even an organic espousal of analysis, but rather a preferential misdirection of the information at hand (Marxist shill?).
And if you sincerely are as inept as your comment suggests, I will have you know that a theory IS framework.
It is a narrow explanation and isn’t that factual. Keep ad hominem out of it, there are clear and obvious issues with this text — which have been explained in the comment section.
I don’t see how the comparison is so difficult to understand, for some people. Karl Marx founded Marxism, which is the idea behind communism.
Marxism = his vision.
Communism = his vision put to work.
SIMPLE…
But both Hitler and Stalin were outdone by Mao Zedong. From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.
And let’s not forget the utter tyranny of Pol Pot!
You say that Marxism is the theory while Communism is the implementation of Marxism, but then you stress that Marxism is the framework by which communism develops such that communism becomes the theory and Marxism the implementation of communism, which is obviously contradictory. As well, Marx did not create communism, but blended portions of communism, socialism, Hegelianism, Feurbachism, Engelism, and a number of other ideologies combined to create what is now known as Marxism. The difference, and yes there is one and perhaps many, between communism and Marxism is that communism far preceded Marxism historically and when it did exist, it lacked the philosophic input of Marx and was simply a community (the word from whence communism derives) of people sharing property, goods, and labour without capital or a the notion of private property. This especially obvious with the Native Americans, but also of African tribalism, and ancient Druid societies in Britain as well as other historical communal societies (i.e. communism) throughout the world and history. In fact, even the early Christians lived in a communal societies and today, monasteries are examples of functioning communism, albeit not Marxism. The great difference then is that Marxism is a philosophic ideology that goes beyond simple commune living and explain the alienation capitalism creates in a number of areas for an individual, the faults of private property, of capital, and of class, the benefits of communism over capitalism, the faults of religion and the benefits of a merger between communism and atheism, and many other things that make it quite distinct from the overall broad notion of communism which simply espouses communal living without any hierarchical structure based on property ownership or fictitious capital, though in many communist societies tribal chiefs are revered and sought for advice and wisdom creating a hierarchy based on spiritualism, which Marx would oppose. A reading of “The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844,” “The Communist Manifesto,” and “Capital” may help you better understand where you are wrong, which is essentially everywhere.
The early church in Jerusalem did put all their money and goods together. Their problem: they did not do well, and all the other churches that had money sent support to Jerusalem.
>> The early church in Jerusalem did put all their money and goods together.
** The early church in Jerusalem did put all their money and goods together. **
It is also true that they did so voluntarily; it was not forced upon them by the State.
I have also observed that the leaders of Communist regimes tend to exempt themselves (and their officials) from the tenet: “From each according to his ability; to each according to his needs” as most appear to be (have been) wealthy.
When the old Communist bloc fell, it was discovered that there were State-run stores where high-ranking party officials could purchase Western goods (designer jeans, CD/DVD players, appliances, etc. not available to the common person) at government subsidized prices.
It appears to me that Communism is just as susceptible to corruption as any other system of managing the population.
I believe the Pilgrims or maybe the Puritans began as a socialist society and had to change because it did not work. Nobody worked very hard because they all shared everything. They changed to individual ownership and businesses, etc. (capitalism), and began to flourish. That’s the problem, if you don’t have to work to get what you need, many will work just enough to get by. Too bad, but that is how people are, generally speaking–with some exceptions.
This is a false bit of history. The problem with your comment is you’re assigning broad labels to specific periods in history. As a matter of fact, you list the necessities of community organization for the good of all who must trade unique, individual skills to survive as socialism.
You might try reading the Preamble to our Constitution.
the pilgrims in fact started out as equal share….no matter the work done…it turned out to be a disaster….when William Bradford, one of their leaders determined to give all an equal amount of acreage to do as they please…
the bounty that came from the decision was essentially the birth of capitalism…in the US of A
Thank you for your great reply!
But both Hitler and Stalin were outdone by Mao Zedong. From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.
Just zero wisdom, they will starve you if you give them a chance 45 million people!!! Truth .. and just giving a shit about the suffering people , look at Cuba right now. Everyone has words but no care for those who were murdered through starvation.. anyone that stands for COMMIES is heartless and foolish. There is over 2 millions Muslim’s and more in SLAVERY IN CHINA RIGHT NOW SUFFERING .. but yea blah blah blah think what you want. Maybe put your feet in there shoeless feet and imagine starving to death while you enjoy your hot shower and hot coffee and supper and a thin line till you’re in the which I hope that on No human.. communism is terrible.. and sneaky so be wise and maybe say a prayer for the poor suffering souls out there living under it. Equal suffering for everyone .. poison..
There is no communist country that has succeeded in bringing about equality. Karl Marx wanted equality, but Mao and Stalin destroyed lives and brought about great poverty supposedly trying to achieve this equality. Marx’s views were corrupted and manipulated, resulting in catastrophe. Marx wanted the best for everyone, not totalitarian China.
Marx wasn’t correct about a great deal, especially with the utopia which Communism was supposed to bring. Orthodox Marxism which seemingly draws its inspiration from the Manifesto (and not the later writing of Marx or other Marxist) is extremely problematic.
Reform happens to every ideology and Communism in practice leads to authoritarianism, lack of human rights, and a wealth of corruption.
Marx wanted the best for everyone? Ha haaah, then why didn’t he pay his tradesmen’s bills (butcher, baker etc)? Why did he never once visit Eagle’s mills to at least talk to workers and see what they wanted? Yes, the very mills that whose dividends supported Marx, who was utterly incapable of earing anything.
Marx, like his acolyte Stalin (the perfect Communist) cared nothing for people in reality. All theory.
Marx wanted the best for everyone? Ha haaah, then why didn’t he pay his tradesmen’s bills (butcher, baker etc)? Why did he never once visit Engle’s mills to at least talk to workers and see what they wanted? Yes, the very mills that whose dividends supported Marx, who was utterly incapable of earing anything.
Marx, like his acolyte Stalin (the perfect Communist) cared nothing for people in reality. All theory.
The problem is that the citizens are too selfish to implement such a strict philosophy. The people in charge usually turn into dictators, as a result of a corrupt population. A dictator is a ruling class, which goes against the nature of communism and Marxism. People are inherently corrupt. So, true communion has never and probably will never be achieved.
yes that’s true and anither problem particularly with Marxists or communists/socialists is that they considering selfishness a problem of some people but in reality this is a part of each human being character not detachable or changeable !! this is coming since we were very wild and try to survive in those days!!! and we saw examples in USSR OR CHINA !! evry true communists in charge tend to put little bit on side for himself and after for others !!! personaly i describe Marx just a very lazy bastard who never had willing to work and was smart enough just to invent a theory to accuse rich people in his personal problems!!!
Wrong!!!!
Communism- the state owns and dictates all!
Marxism-the people own and dictate all!
Suggested reading- The Communist Manifesto
False. Communism is the system where everyone works as much as they can, but (unlike capitalism) they get everything they need (because everyone is producing in their fields.), there is no state (as stated in the COMMUNIST manifesto, no countries, no nations, no social classes, and thus no exploitation. Money would become worthless. Socialism the the system where there IS social class, money, buying and selling, nations, countries, and the state. Marxism is the idea that Socialism is the bridge between communism and capitalism and that society will eventually cross that bridge.
By the way, the USSR and the eastern bloc were State Capitalist, as socialism died during Lenin’s NEP (which Stalin kept in place.).
You’re both incorrect, you may want to read past the Manifesto to understand the details of Marxism and the different ideological wings of it.
Marxism thought has brought about Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism. Even Marx walked back his thoughts on the need of violence in order for reform to occur. The Manifesto was his early work and his thoughts developed.
Also, do not defend leaders like Stalin. He, Pol Pot, and Mao were genocidal authoritarians who were following early Marxism where the Manifesto was born.
Whether Marxism succeeded?
With out a state how people dictate? To implement Marxism , need a mechanism!
With out a leadership structure can we implement a mechanism?
Can any one give assurance about a non corrupt practices??
Non-Marxist Communists, including among them anarcho-Communists Peter Kropotkin, Emma Goldman, Alexander Berkman, and Errico Malatesta, would disagree with you claiming that Marxism and Communism are the same.
please provide the sources you used to validate your definitions.
Also to the “what about” peeps. Don’t matter the political spectrum, what kills is authoritarianism. Wake up! I wouldn’t want to live under either communism or a Christian theocrathy. Morals be damned. Let me BE!