The Difference Between Communism and Marxism

The basis of the communist economic theory is often attributed to Karl Marx for his book Das Kapital. While Marx certainly defined much of what would later be heralded by those who have high regard for the communist theory, his name is often attributed to regimes that don't reflect any of the ideals Marx puts forth in his economic theory.

As a philosopher, Marx is not as highly regarded for his economic theory as he is for his predictions about how society would react when poor people amass sufficiently and have had enough of business as usual.

In the communist theory, people are equal. Society would own the means of production which, of course, would eliminate the greed factor. There is an obvious problem with that premise, and so the entire theory begins to crumble because greed is a human nature. 

If greed weren't a problem, though, all people would contribute according to their abilities and draw based upon their needs, with all the excesses that go to individuals in capitalism being retained by the entire population to enjoy. Of course, other human natures include gluttony, laziness, envy, and vanity, and so the theory keeps on crumbling as human natures destroy an imagined utopia.

Marx made a similar mistake as have many philosophers whose theories result in economic utopia: it relies upon human principles to change into human natures. That defies nature. Nature always beats principles except in specific instances that are the lore of legends. Life requires us to live on a conscious level, but utopia would require us to evolve into living on a conscience level.

If you want to criticize Marx for his thoughts on how people would change in order to embrace the original economy, so be it. However, on a small scale, it works great. If you think about it, the most common form of communal living arrangements are families. If each does as they are supposed to and gives it their best effort, and everyone only takes what is personally needed, there can be excesses that everyone enjoys, and belongs to the family.

What we call Marxism has little to do with an economy, and Marxism nothing to do with communism as Marx envisioned it. As a social philosopher, Marx regarded unfettered capitalism as a form of slavery in that by claiming ownership of some resources, individuals become virtual slave owners by receiving all the capital for the production and giving mere pittances of it to those whose labor actually produces the capital. 

He would have been a young man about the time that Dickens was calling out the rich. He was influenced by Hegelian philosophy, which is where he got his atheist beliefs. He was a journalist who criticized the German government so loudly that he had to seek refuge in London. It was there that he met Friedrich Engels, the collaborator for his most famous work.

What makes Marx one of the greatest social philosophers ever is his prediction about how these communist economies would come about. When discontented people amassed sufficiently after having their labor stolen from them, they will join together as a community and seize the means of production from the rich people who are stealing their labor. The revolutions that he predicted have not only materialized, but they also make it predictable to know where civil unrest is reaching critical levels.

The governments that are formed after these revolutions are appropriately called Marxist regimes. The economies that emerge from these Marxist regimes rarely have any resemblance to the economy that Marx suggested would be the result. Not only are people not treated equally after most Marxist takeovers, but the power of controlling the means of both production and delivery often results in economies with similar chasms between the wealth of a few compared to the masses as capitalism does. They also often include oppression of anyone who is deemed a dissident.

So, while communism is often attributed to Karl Marx, we know that tribes of early people shared food and resources. He may have described it in such a way that terms he used in Das Kapital have stuck to the concept he was describing, but the earliest forms of mankind had to share resources and labor for the benefit of the group in order to survive. Ultimately, communism is the oldest form of economy of all because it is, essentially, a tribal economy.

Communism is simply an economic theory in which no individuals own the means of production or the resources. Marxism is the form of government resulting from an uprising of labor forces or common people to overthrow the wealthy and politically powerful people for not sharing the value of resources with them, as Karl Marx predicted would happen. 

Communism was not the brainchild of Karl Marx; the revolutions that he thought would result in his utopic economy are his eerily accurate prediction of what then was the future and now bear his name.