Such a wide variety of people describe themselves as Marxist, I'm not sure how much it tells me about them. They're certainly not communist usually. Grok says:
"You're right that the label "Marxist" can be slippery, covering a wide range of beliefs and not necessarily equating to communism. It’s more of a lens than a strict doctrine. People calling themselves Marxists often draw from Karl Marx’s ideas—class struggle, critique of capitalism, historical materialism—but apply them in wildly different ways. Some are academic theorists, others are activists; some are revolutionary, others reformist. They might agree on capitalism’s flaws but split on solutions, from democratic socialism to anarchism or even milder critiques of inequality.
Unlike communists, who typically advocate for a stateless, classless society with collective ownership of production (and often align with specific historical models like the USSR or Maoist China), Marxists don’t always endorse that endgame. Many reject authoritarian regimes, focusing instead on Marx’s analytical tools to critique modern economies or power structures. For example, a self-described Marxist might just mean they see class dynamics driving history, not that they’re plotting a proletarian uprising.
The label’s vagueness comes from its adaptability—Marxism’s been stretched across contexts, from 19th-century Europe to post-colonial movements to today’s academic and online spaces. Someone saying “I’m a Marxist” could signal anything from “I read Capital and vibe with it” to “I’m in a reading group that debates dialectical materialism.” It’s less a clear ideology than a starting point."
It's like saying I'm Christian. It doesn't tell you much.
Grok: "Exactly. Calling yourself a Marxist is like saying you're Christian—it's a broad tent. Just as Christians range from televangelists to liberation theologians, Marxists span from ivory-tower scholars to street activists. The label hints at a worldview—class struggle for Marxists, faith in Christ for Christians—but without specifics, it’s more vibe than blueprint."
Batya Ungar Sargon, Trump supporter, calls herself a Marxist.
Grok says: "Batya Ungar-Sargon’s self-description as a “Marxist” and a Trump supporter, or “MAGA leftist,” is a striking example of how the Marxist label can be stretched to fit unconventional political alignments, reinforcing your point about its vagueness. It’s like calling oneself a Christian while advocating for something seemingly contradictory—say, a libertarian free-market zealot. The label alone doesn’t clarify much without context.
Ungar-Sargon, a journalist and deputy opinion editor at Newsweek, has a Ph.D. in English from UC Berkeley and a background in leftist circles. She’s authored books like Second Class: How the Elites Betrayed America’s Working Men and Women, which critiques elite abandonment of the working class, and Bad News: How Woke Media Is Undermining Democracy, targeting liberal media’s shift from class to race-based narratives. Her “Marxism” seems to focus on class struggle and economic exploitation, drawing from Marxist critiques of power and ideology, but she applies these to support Trump’s policies, like tariffs and immigration restrictions, which she sees as pro-worker and anti-elite.
This blend—Marxist rhetoric with MAGA priorities—has sparked confusion and criticism. On Real Time with Bill Maher, she called herself a “MAGA leftist,” prompting Maher to quip, “That makes no sense.” Critics like economic historian Phil Magness question her economic grasp, calling her Marxist label a “gimmick” given her lack of deep engagement with Marxist theory on exploitation or alienation. Others on X mock the “MAGA Marxist” idea as incoherent or opportunistic. Her support for Trump’s tariffs, which she claims fight Wall Street for the “forgotten working class,” has been challenged for factual errors, like misattributing the 2008 TARP bailout to Obama instead of Bush.
Her stance seems to cherry-pick Marxist ideas—class warfare, anti-elitism—while aligning with Trump’s nationalist, protectionist agenda, which clashes with traditional Marxist internationalism or anti-capitalist revolution. It’s less about orthodox Marxism (which would reject Trump’s capitalism and imperialism) and more about using Marxist framing to appeal to working-class resentment, a tactic some see as populist rebranding. Steve Bannon, for instance, praises her as a “populist-nationalist” who resonates with MAGA audiences.
So, her “Marxism” tells you she’s focused on class and power dynamics but doesn’t mean she’s a communist or even a traditional leftist. It’s a idiosyncratic mix, blending leftist critique with right-wing solutions."
LF: Oliver Anthony released viral song a couple years ago, “Rich Men North of Richmond.” He complained that “your dollar ain’t shit and it’s taxed to no end" and he sang about “folks in the street [who] ain’t got nothin’ to eat” while “the obese [are] milkin’ welfare.” But he's not a communist.
Grok says: "Oliver Anthony’s “Rich Men North of Richmond,” released in 2023, struck a chord with its raw frustration over economic inequality and government overreach. The lyrics you mentioned reflect Anthony’s view of a devalued dollar crushed by taxes and a system that fails the working class while enabling dependency. His jab at welfare recipients leans into a critique of bureaucracy and misplaced priorities, not a call for collectivism. Anthony’s not a communist—his stance aligns more with populist libertarianism, railing against elites and centralized power while championing individual struggle. He’s explicit about this in interviews, rejecting both left and right labels, focusing instead on systemic betrayal of the common man."
