Collectivism and Anarchist-Communism
Collectivism became a mainstream in the anarchist movement under the influence of the Russian revolutionary aristocrat Mikhail Bakunin, a disciple of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who left the care of farmers and artisans with a view to a future in which organized labor had expropriated capital and each group of workers administers their own means of production.
Collectivism proposed collective ownership of land, raw materials and tools, and the appropriation of the integral product of labor by workers, deducting the cost. The distribution of profits would be made by collective decision, but it was assumed that the remuneration would be proportional to the work done.
Collectivists opposed to communism of Karl Marx and his followers, understanding that could only be imposed by an authoritarian state, a conception that was challenged by the next generation of anarchists. Collectivism would soon be replaced by the communist anarchism (also known as Anarchist-Communism or libertarian communism ), when followers of Bakunin the First International criticize the labor theory of value and the maintenance of pay wage type. "To each according to his needs"; libertarian communism argued that the work product of all belongs to everyone, and everyone has the right to freely take their share. The Anarchist-Communism did not completely rule collectivism, however, considering an intermediate step that would evolve towards communism.
Anarchism-Communist promotes voluntary association state without class differences and equality through community ownership or socialization of the means of production, services and consumer goods. The Anarchist-Communism emphasizes the collective experience as distinct and important in the pursuit of individual freedom.
Peter Kropotkin, a Russian philosopher, understood that cooperation is the key to evolutionary success and that human beings were the species most successful for their ability to cooperate effectively ; thus, Kropotkin believed that the last stage of evolution in human societies was a social life where competition does not exist and people cooperate on equal terms, freely and naturally.
He called for the abolition of private property through "expropriation of all social wealth" by the people themselves. He also argued that the collapse with private property would lead to anarchy.
Anarchy leads to Communism and Communism to anarchy and both are nothing but the predominant trend in modern societies, the pursuit of equality.
Kropotkin argued that there is no way to validate or there is little scope to measure the value of the economic contribution of a person because of every discovery, every progress, every increase in wealth of mankind, has its origin in the conjunction of manual and intellectual work of the past and present. Also, he advocated the economy organized through a horizontal network of voluntary associations, in which the goods would be distributed according to the needs of the individual, rather than depending on the job. Individuals and communities implement the use and control of any of the resources they needed, "leaving everyone free to consume as they wish in their own homes."
Image Citation Bakunin Marx Kropotkin
Resources: wiki
Thanks for reading ;)
~allmonitors



As a Cooperative Agorist, I've always had a certain respect for Anarchist-Communists. Over the years, I've learnt both from them and other groups.
Being an Anarcho-Capitalist, I still don't agree on the fundamentals of Capitalism of course, but I do see many good things and actually find that I get along well with most Anarchists.
wonderful insights, thanks
Your wikip-based introduction has done better in 11 minutes ($0.60), than everything I have tried to do on the subject, combined! Nice!
Yes, I am not happy. :-)
I agree with you that these are many roads leading to roughly the same place - equality that does not need to be enforced by a gang - not one that is appointed, selected, elected, or forced upon us. Equality of being and opportunity, but for the anarcho-capitalists not equality in economic outcomes/wealth distribution - no free lunch n all that.
Anyway, use of "collectivist" or "collectivism", is simply a belief that the good of the many should come first - the good of the individual, or the one, flows to them only if everyone's needs are being met. Again, the counter to that is that the good of the many only comes when indivudals seek their own self-interest - the bi-product of putting themselves first, taking full responsibility so on and so forth, is social good in itself.
I have mixed feelings about the whole damn thing .. and so should everyone. ;-)
indeed.. goods should be controlled by the state, by the people. thanks