Are The Woke Actually Marxists?

“Marxism” is a common charge on the Right and is especially used against the current crop of Woke activists – i.e., supporters of critical race theory, transsexualism, destroying monuments to Washington and Jefferson, and anything else that was basically unheard of 15 years ago. But, are they actually Marxists or is it just another overused insult? The answer is both yes and no.

However, to understand why, we must first look at the core of Marxism and, more specifically, the way orthodox Marxists view history. For orthodox Marxism, history is driven by material economic conditions, so what really drives history is economic interests and anything else, be it religion, honor, etc. is really just a cover for economic concerns. To give a brief example, in the Marxist mind, the Crusades were not an attempt to win back the Holy Land for Christ, but rather was an attempt for nobles to acquire more land.

The way these economic interests are sorted though is by class; thus, class becomes the core component of historical development. This means that people are more united by class than something like religion and nation – a Frenchman or Arab, of the same class, have more in common than with another Frenchman or Arab of a different class. The same goes for religion as well, and the only reason the masses cannot see this is because they have been deceived by the upper-class in an attempt to maintain their rule. This is at the core of the Marxist hatred of both nation and religion, both are considered a blinding fog that keeps the masses from recognizing class-oppression. History then moves by a series of class conflicts. The French Revolution, in the orthodox Marxist mind, was a revolution of the middle-class against the nobility to establish a government that was more in line with what the middle-class desired – a liberal, democratic, and capitalistic order against the feudalism of the ancient regime. According to Marx, eventually the working-class would do the same, establishing a socialist order that was more to their liking.

Before I go any further, let me say that I do not deny that economic conditions are a major driving force in history. And, class also matters. Economics is important and sometimes economic motivations can be hidden. I wrote an article about how Antifa doxxings are motivated by economics, namely failed elites taking down their competition. But the problem is that, while economic conditions are important, as is class, not all of history can be reduced to such things. Take the “Scramble for Africa” as an example. The classic Marxist explanation is that it was motivated by a desire for new markets. Still, the facts to not back this up. In reality, African colonies cost Europe a tremendous amount of money and were too poor for them to dump products. The “Scramble for Africa” was more motivated by national pride and a genuine feeling that it was the duty of the White race to lift up the other races.

With the orthodox understanding of history, economics, and class out of the way, we can now see the difficulty in calling the Woke as Marxists – they don’t appear to care about economics all that much and certainly don’t care about class. How else do they get the frankly absurd notion that I, as a White, Christian, Southern male, am the oppressor of the likes of LeBron James, Elton John, and Nicole Kidman, even as they make more money in a year than I, or likely anyone reading this article, will make in a lifetime? Why are they so keen to rat out working-class people to their plutocratic bosses for thoughtcrime and then call it justice? How do the likes of Robin diAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi make millions from billionaires by telling people making under $70,000 a year that the real problem is White men rather than the ruling-class? These do not appear to be the actions of the orthodox Marxists that mistakenly reduced everything to class, but rather ideologues that have made a new error of completely ignoring class.

Nevertheless, in a certain way, the Woke are Marxists, they are just not orthodox Marxists. In order to understand this, we must comprehend a particular obsession of all Marxists – the promised revolution that never happened. Drawing from the writings of Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci, a theory crept into Marxism that the capitalist class had created a smokescreen of ideological hegemony that made the working-class consider their values as aligned with the ruling-class, specifically on race, religion, family, etc. The task at hand was to create a competing ideology that could slowly but surely take over the existing society. This is the “long march through the institutions” and the origins of Cultural Marxism.

Throughout the 20th century, a greater number of Marxists shifted from the economic focus of classical Marxism to one that put greater emphasis on race, sex, family, etc. – it was considered as the needed step in ushering a Marxist revolution. This became even more apparent thanks to two trends in the 20th century: (1) the Soviet Union not becoming the paradise they had hoped for and (2) the rightward shift from the American working-class core, that is White, male, and mostly Catholic or Evangelical. While Marx predicted that the working-class would move to the Far Left and overthrow capitalism during a time of great crisis, that is not what the working-class in the most advanced capitalist nation on earth did when the turmoil of the late 1960s and early 1970s hit. Instead, they moved to the Right, supporting Richard Nixon and George Wallace. This trend would be later observed in the 1980s when the White working-class supported Ronald Reagan and again in the 1990s with Pat Buchanan and, to a lesser extent, David Duke. We’ve seen this trend continue with Trump and beyond. Antifa is a movement of the Professional Managerial Class (PMC), or at least their children are, while the Proud Boys are the actual working-class. To say that history has not turned out the way Marx envisioned is an understatement.

While the Woke Left long ago stopped caring about class warfare in favor of race, sexual orientation, and gender identity, they are still agitating in hopes of triggering a revolution, but now with oppressed races (especially blacks) and the alphabet soup of weirdos taking center stage rather than the working-class. By understanding this, we can also realize what the stakes are for the White and conservative working-class. It is a common refrain from White Nationalists that White Nationalism is needed because all Whites are hated the same amount (a claim I find absurd). I cannot believe that Russians and Southerners are hated the same amount as Swedes and White Canadians. Some White nations are hating more because they have done a better job fighting back against globohomo. But, this is also not true on a class level – the White working-class really is hated significantly more than the White PMC class. Part of this is because, much like certain White nations, the White working-class has put up a greater amount of resistance.

However, it also goes deeper than that and there are more valuable insights as to why the White working-class is so despised – they are, in the eyes of Marxists, worse than open enemies, they are traitors. Hating a traitor more than an open enemy is very common throughout all of human history. Just look at how Dante was willing to name Saladin among the “righteous pagans,” but condemned the traitors not merely to hell but the lowest circle of hell.  Therefore, the White working-class becomes a particular target for the Woke Left’s vitriol due to their Marxist roots. The working-class was given the task to overthrow capitalism and usher in a socialist utopia. Instead, they stuck with their nations and religion, forcing the Marxists to adopt a new playbook.

It is from that shift that the Woke were born. They will never forgive the White working-class for that, hence the hatred for them and the desire to destroy everything they hold dear.

10 comments

  1. “Cultural Marxist” was originally a term of derision of the OG economic Marxists against those Marxists who were merely “cultural Marxists”

    The RationalWiki article on it is actually pretty good. Broken clocks and all

    1. Yep, reading about the split between them in the 1960s is pretty fascinating.

  2. I actually agree with much of your well-written article, except that your premise seems to be that Marxism is subject to rational analysis, and its proponents, of whatever variety (economic or cultural) are people who can be intellectually engaged. Solzhenitsyn, who knew them very well, wrote of them:

    “These devotees of the theory of development construed loyalty to that development to mean renunciation of any personal development whatsoever. p. 328. Let life gush over them, surge over them, and even roll over them with wheels—still they won’t let it into their heads! They won’t accept it, as though it weren’t happening at all! This reluctance to change anything inside their own brains, this simple inability to make a critical assessment of their life’s experience, is what they pride themselves on! We are Marxists! We are materialists! How can we possibly change because we landed in prison by sheer chance? p. 336. Impenetrability. That was their chief trait! Armor-piercing shells for iron-heads have not yet been invented! In arguing with them, you wear yourself out unless you accept in advance that the argument is simply a game, a jolly pastime.” p. 338.

    Solzhenitsyn, ‘The Gulag Archipelago Two’, trans. Thomas P. Whitney

    1. It’s not so much debating them as understanding how their thought process works, I think that’s important to understand why they hate the White working class more than the White PMC.

      1. I myself am part of the white working class, so I understand and experience firsthand the important distinction you make. The white PMC have sold their souls in selling out their people; but they’re the ‘useful idiots’ of whom Lenin spoke that will eventually outlive their usefulness and receive the reward of their betrayal.

    2. @German Confederate.

      I’ve been wanting to share this book with you for awhile, “captured!” By Ferdinand H. Horvath. 1930. This is an eyewitness account of the First World War battlefield and the subsequent capture by the Russian military written by an Austrian officer, he escapes right through the Russian Revolution, even blending in with it for a period of time.
      Here is the last paragraph of the book.
      “ Little worms in the dust—Masters of the Earth!. . .
      Far above the placid moon, far above those twinkling stars, above other burning and flaming worlds—too far and too staggering to grasp—may have been the Almighty Master of the Heavens. In this infinite wisdom He kept aloft in ethereal heights, as if watching. . . waiting.
      How long still would Man fare without him. . . ?

      1. Thanks for the recommendation! I’ll look for it online and look forward to adding it to my reading list. I’ll return the favor by recommending ‘From Double Eagle to Red Flag’ by Gen. Pyotr Krasnov, who also saw it all firsthand and lived through WW2 as well. He was also, to my mind, fully the equal of all the great Russian writers in ability.

        https://www.amazon.com/Double-Eagle-Red-Flag/dp/1434458016

  3. The Solz quote is a good one. Another notable insight from him (and others) is that if the Left truly get’s their revolution, their hierarchy is ruthless and purges immediately the lower classes that served their interests as well as those not sufficiently orthodox. Look at how quickly the knives turned inward with the Jacobins and proto-Marxist spirit of the French Revolution. The mutants in the streets and the Trans teachers in the kindergarten classes won’t survive the first 30 days.

    1. One thing I bring up often is that Stalin was a bank robber, but the intellectuals wound up in a ditch. Criminals always beat out college students during a revolution.

Comments are closed.