Philosophical–Political Anarchology: Critique of Political Marxism as a Reinforcing Factor of Capitalism toward Anarchoracy as an Alternative to Democracy

 Philosophical–Political Anarchology: Critique of Political Marxism as a Reinforcing Factor of Capitalism toward Anarchoracy as an Alternative to Democracy

✍️ Mahmoud Sadeghi Janbehan

Translated by ChatGPT. Accessed September 22, 202

✅ Introduction

Political Marxism has always held an important position as an anti-capitalist theory and is recognized as one of the most valuable modern philosophical and political systems. However, historical experiences and its theoretical foundations indicate that this approach has not only failed to exert a decisive influence on the political and economic directions of the capitalist system, but in many instances has contributed to its reproduction and reinforcement. This article, relying on the framework of philosophical–political anarchology, critiques the philosophical and political foundations of Marxism and analyzes how historical determinism, state-centrism, and class reductionism in political Marxism have led to the formation of centralized states and the reproduction of power relations. In contrast, philosophical–political anarchology, by rejecting all forms of power concentration and emphasizing powerless self-governance, outlines a new horizon for social liberation and justice.

Since the nineteenth century, Marxism has been one of the most significant theoretical frameworks in the critique of capitalism, inspiring numerous political and social movements of the twentieth century. Nevertheless, history shows that the experience of so-called socialist states not only failed to establish classless societies but also produced repressive regimes and inefficient economies. The central question of this article is: How did political Marxism, instead of dismantling capitalism, become a reinforcing factor for it? To answer this, the article draws upon the theoretical foundations of philosophical–political anarchology—a framework that analyzes and critiques domination not merely in economic terms, but across all dimensions of social life, including family, culture, education, politics, and psychology.

✅ Political Marxism and the Dynamics of Global Capitalism

Globalization has extended capitalism beyond the nation-state framework, transforming it into a transnational, networked system. In this process, economic control and policy-making have increasingly shifted to supranational institutions, while the power of the global capitalist class has risen relative to national states and working classes. Consequently, the limitations and constraints that nation-states previously imposed on capitalism have been dismantled in favor of capital accumulation and the expansion of the global capitalist class. The outcome of these developments has been increased inequality, the flexibility of capitalism, and the growth of informal labor.

In this context, twentieth-century Marxist systems—from the Soviet Union to Eastern Europe—faced structural problems and deep inefficiencies. Their collapse not only signaled managerial and economic incapacity but also revealed the fundamental theoretical weaknesses of Marxism in adapting to global developments and the information economy.

✅ Internal Crisis and the Collapse of Marxist Systems

The reasons behind the collapse of Marxist systems are manifold: economic inefficiency, centralized bureaucracy, ideological rigidity, monopolistic control, state-centrism, limitations on political freedoms, and inability to respond to global changes. These factors, combined with international pressures and internal divisions, led to the failure and disintegration of socialist regimes. Analysts such as Harvard’s Joachim Jan attribute this failure to Marxism’s inability to adapt to technological advancements and the information economy, while others highlight authoritarianism, superficial reforms, and divergence from Marx’s original ideas.

As a result, so-called socialist states not only diverged from their ideological goals but, through repression and reproduction of hierarchical power, paved the way for the return and even strengthening of capitalism.

✅ The Critical Value and Limitations of Marxism

Theoretically, Marxism continues to offer valuable critiques of capitalism, particularly in analyzing human alienation and the need to restore individuals as free and creative beings. This aspect of Marx’s legacy remains inspirational in critiquing capitalist values. However, when these principles were implemented through totalitarian states and centralized planning, the outcome was nothing but deviation and failure.

Political Marxism, due to these inefficiencies, not only failed to dismantle capitalism but effectively became a reinforcing factor for it. State-centrism and historical determinism, rather than producing liberation, generated new forms of domination, allowing capitalism to reconstruct itself globally and become more resilient. While political Marxism retains its significance as a philosophical and critical system in analyzing capitalism, it has been unable to destabilize the capitalist system practically and politically. The twentieth-century experience shows that its reliance on state-centrism, historical determinism, and class reductionism facilitated the reproduction of domination and the strengthening of capitalism.

✅ Foundations of Philosophical–Political Anarchology

Philosophical–political anarchology represents a novel foundation in contemporary political thought, placing the critique of domination and power concentration at its core. This framework is based on several key principles, both philosophical and practical. First, the rejection of concentrated power—no centralized form of power, whether in capitalist states, socialist states, or parliamentary democracy, is legitimate; its continuation reproduces domination and restricts freedom. Power, from the perspective of anarchology, is networked and multifaceted, not limited to official state structures or economic institutions.

Second, powerless self-governance, a foundational principle organizing society around horizontal networks, mutual aid, active participation, and collective decision-making without domination. Social structures are neither imposed from above nor controlled by a specific class; rather, individuals and groups actively shape collective life through continuous action and resistance.

Third, multi-dimensional critique: domination is not merely economic or class-based, but also gendered, ethnic, cultural, linguistic, and psychological. Any comprehensive social critique must consider all these dimensions simultaneously. Philosophical–political anarchology demonstrates that real liberation occurs only when all forms of domination are critically analyzed and reconstructed concurrently.

Fourth, current possibilities: liberation is neither a distant, predestined promise nor the outcome of a predetermined historical path, but the product of creative action and present resistance. History, in this framework, is neither linear nor confined by deterministic laws; it is a field of ruptures, resistance, and multiple possibilities in which individuals and collectives can actively participate.

In sum, philosophical–political anarchology emphasizes the linkage between individual freedom and collective justice, ensuring that neither is sacrificed for the other. This approach provides not only theoretical critique but also a practical horizon for reconstructing society, self-governance without domination, and achieving social liberation.

✅ Theoretical Critique of Political Marxism

From the perspective of philosophical–political anarchology, political Marxism suffers from three fundamental flaws that have prevented it from dismantling capitalism and have often reinforced it. First, historical determinism: Marx presents history as a linear progression of productive forces from feudalism to capitalism, and then to socialism and communism. This perspective ignores multiple historical possibilities and present actions, resulting in a “mechanical historicism” that confines social liberation to a predetermined path.

Second, state-centrism: political Marxism views the state as the primary instrument for transitioning from capitalism. Experience, however, shows that state-centrism not only fails to eliminate domination but reproduces it in bureaucratic and centralized forms.

Third, class reductionism: Marxism reduces all forms of oppression ultimately to class struggle, marginalizing other dimensions of domination—gender, ethnicity, culture, and psychology. Philosophical–political anarchology considers this reductionism incomplete; true liberation requires simultaneous critique and analysis of all forms of domination.

Historically and politically, rather than dismantling capitalism, political Marxism has often reinforced it. Centralized socialist states—from the Soviet Union to China and North Korea—became another form of capitalist-like states, with a new bureaucratic class replacing the traditional bourgeoisie. Economic inefficiency and central planning failures paved the way for the return of capitalism, even in harsher neoliberal forms. Marxist ideology, instead of liberating humans, became a tool for political control and reproduction of domination. Thus, political Marxism, contrary to its claims, not only failed to destroy capitalism but effectively became a reinforcing factor for it.

✅ The Political Anarchology Alternative: Anarchoracy

In response to the failures of political Marxism and the limitations of democracy, philosophical–political anarchology offers an alternative known as Anarchoracy. This alternative differs from Marxism in several key dimensions: first, the rejection of any form of state-centrism and emphasis on horizontal self-governing networks, enabling collective decision-making without domination. Second, critique of all forms of domination, not only class-based, but including gender, ethnicity, culture, language, and psychological dimensions. Third, the view of liberation as a present, ongoing process, not a predestined future promise or outcome of a linear historical path. Fourth, the integration of individual freedom and collective justice, ensuring that neither is sacrificed for the other.

Unlike political Marxism, which in practice reinforced capitalism, Anarchoracy opens new possibilities for social liberation, powerless self-governance, and the realization of a free, equal, and creative society. It is not only a theoretical critique but also a practical and philosophical horizon for reconstructing society, eliminating domination across all dimensions of social life, and enabling active and simultaneous participation of all individuals in collective decision-making and social formation.

Sadeghi Janbehan, Mahmoud. “Philosophical–Political Anarchology: Critique of Political Marxism as a Reinforcing Factor of Capitalism toward Anarchoracy as an Alternative to Democracy.” Translated by ChatGPT. Accessed September 22, 2025.

URL: https://anarchology.blogfa.com