According to Osho, Kropotkin’s anarchism has no element of communism; the two are historic enemies. Anarchists reject any state apparatus, while communism depends on state power and dictatorship to enforce itself, promising a future withering away that anarchists deem impossible. Beyond this debate, Osho stresses inner anarchy—cultivating order within life’s inherent insecurity—over external political arrangements.
No—Kropotkin didn’t mix anarchism with communism; he rejected any state machinery to force equality, and Osho says what really matters is growing inner order in a messy, unsafe world.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Osho, does Kropotkin’s anarchism contain some element of communism?
No. Kropotkin and the others have nothing to do with communism; in fact, they are its enemies. Because, in their view, communism cannot come without state power. To bring communism you need the apparatus of the state, a dictatorship—only then can you impose it. And they do not accept that any apparatus is needed. Hence there was opposition between them and communism. Anarchists and communists have been enemies; there is no common ground between them. Communism says that one day the state, developing further and further, will wither away. But anarchists say: the more the state develops, the stronger it becomes—how is it going to wither away? My position is very different. For me it is not very important whether there is a state or not, whether there is an external order or not. Man should become such that he can remain orderly even within disorder. Man should be like…
Beloved Osho, if national boundaries and visa restrictions continue to separate us from you and from each other, what is best for us to do about it?
They will not. It is for me to find a way that they don't restrict you from seeing me, from being with me. I am working on it, and I don't think it will take a long time to find a way; perhaps a month at the most. So nobody need worry about it. We will soon have our own place which will not be under any country's rule. And I want a totally new experiment that has not happened in history. There have been anarchists -- their philosophy is one of the best. But it is so good that it becomes impossible to make it real; it remains utopian. Prince Kropotkin, Tolstoy -- these people dreamed of a humanity which one day would drop all governments. They thought that governments are the causes of all the evil that exists on the earth. To some extent they are right, but…
According to you, nobody is able to impart the truth. Is what you say not true then?
What I am telling you is only an indication and should not be regarded as true in itself. Truth is far removed from indication. It is not the indicator you have to see, but where it directs you. While you are looking in that direction what you will perceive is the truth. There is no way to speak that truth. No sooner has it been uttered than it becomes false. The truth can never be expressed; however, it can become one's experience.
Osho, the vernacular newspaper here has been propagating that your discourses, your teaching, aim at spreading communism—and that you are almost on a par with Mao. And today another question has been raised: comparing you with J. Krishnamurti. What are your thoughts on this?
First of all, as I understand it, any intelligent person in the world—from Buddha or Mahavira or Christ up to today—will inevitably, in some sense, be a communist. But the meaning of communism should be made clear. The endeavor of all wise people has always been to bring about a society where each human being attains a state of equality, and where each person has equal opportunity for growth. If communism means the effort toward equal opportunities for growth and the equality of human beings, then I am a communist. And whoever is not a communist in that sense is an enemy of humanity. But if someone thinks that “communists” are the blind devotees of Marx who, by force, crush all democratic sentiments and impose dictatorship; who murder the entire vision of God, truth, love, and soul—if that is what is meant by communism, then no one could be more…
So communists say `somewhere far away in the future' -- which cannot be predicted unless the whole world becomes communist and there is no fear of outside interference, the government cannot be dissolved. On the contrary, the government has to be made stronger to enforce equality amongst man because man has become accustomed of being unequal for so long that it is not easy for him to drop the habit. And nobody wants to be equal to anybody, everybody wants to be higher and superior. To destroy this tendency of being superior and higher a very strict government is needed. That's why they say democracy cannot bring communism, it is a very loose government. Only a dictatorship of the proletariat. So that is the first step for communists to establish a dictatorship of the proletariat. How anarchists and communists can meet?