Are You a Marxist?

Email Print



To my shock, dismay, and grief, a leading Shakespeare
scholar recently referred to “neo-Marxists” in the English
departments of our universities. He wasn’t criticizing such
scholars; on the contrary, he called them “men and women of
the greatest independence of mind.”

Funny how you can exempt yourself from the crimes of Marxism by
adding the prefix neo. A neo-Nazi isn’t usually regarded as
a higher life form than a regular old Nazi, but a neo-Marxist is
supposed to be unrelated to the folks who gave the world the gulag,
the reeducation camp, and the vast boneyards of Siberia, China,
and Cambodia.

What’s more, the original Marx is being honored with a fancy
new edition of The Communist Manifesto, which is now 150
years old.

So Marx is good, and neo-Marxists are good. It was just the people
who ruled countries in the name of Marx who were bad, you see. They
“betrayed” Marx – Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Pol
Pot, and the rest of those brutes.

Was there anything about Marx’s ideas that made them especially
susceptible to “betrayal”? This is the question you’re
not supposed to ask, because the answer is so obvious. When an idea
is “betrayed” every single time it’s put into practice,
the fault doesn’t lie with the practitioners alone.

There has never been a humane communist regime. Marxism is inherently
totalitarian. It recognizes no moral limits on the state. It’s
the most convenient ideology for aspiring tyrants; it also retains
its appeal for intellectuals, who have proved equally skillful at
rationalizing abuses of power and at exculpating themselves.

If the tyrants had really “betrayed” Marx, you’d
expect the true-blue Marxists to be nervously vigilant against pseudo-Marxist
despots. But they never are. They are always willing to trust every
new ruler who acts in the holy name of Marxism.

The most successful ideology of the 20th century denied any divine
element in man or the universe warranting modesty in the state.
That meant the end of privacy. People were punished for their thoughts
– even thoughts they hadn’t had yet, but which the Marxist
rulers could predict they would have because of their class membership.
(“Scientific” socialism didn’t have to wait until
they had really committed crimes, not even thought-crimes.)

the rest of the article

Sobran (1946–2010), conservative turned libertarian, was one
of the most significant American writers of his time. See his
and his
intellectual journey

Email Print