A Wake-up Call for Jeremy Corbyn

Why the Denunciation of Marxism Matters

The threat of authoritarianism looms in the minds of British voters but depending on which side the political aisle, the type of authoritarianism differs greatly. For many, it will be a throwback to the type of xenophobic nationalism that that pushed Britain into a devastating war. Though the memories of those who can remember the horrors of era are fading into oblivion, the cinematic images of hatred still persists in our zeitgeist. The men in similar uniforms united in their goal of extinguishing certain unwanted races and lifestyles. They see Trump and his nationalistic offspring as a symptom of this disease. It ignited the support of Brexit. Its mission is to turn people against each other.
For others the type of authoritarianism is the radical left and its nefarious brand of identity politics. In similar fashion, they harp back to the past, to the great terror of communism, the supposed noble pursuit of equality faltering into oppression and genocide.

Courtesy of Aslan McLennan

In many ways, both sides are right. Both show disturbing trends of authoritarian behavior. Both on the right and left, you will see a resurgence of anti-antisemitism. On the right you will see many defenders of authoritarian icons like Vladimir Putin, one of the main engineers of this deeply polemic era. Multiculturalism is a dirty word among the alt-right. There’s talks of liberal media conspiracy. On the radical left you will find people more than willing to silence any debate when opinions or facts conflict with their world-view- in some cases violence is encouraged for the greater good.
Whatever side you’re on, when you live under a totalitarian rule, it doesn’t matter either way. Though the philosophical roots might differ, the terror is equally oppressive. Both forms need to be denounced.
While Britain doesn’t seem to be in danger of crumbing under an authoritarian rule, it’s still important, especially from our democratically elected leaders to watch out for the warning signs and to understand the philosophical roots that inspired totalitarian societies. With that wisdom and understanding, the aim is to conserve one’s democratic society and to have an absolutist stance any brand of authoritarianism, past or present.
And this means, above all else, Marxism.

The Necessary Wake-up Call

The presence of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour Party Leader has been met with discontent and controversy, not just from the opposition but from within the party itself. For some Labour Party members, Corbyn’s positions on either economics or foreign policy are too unfeasible, bordering on lunacy. Some have accused him to lacking leadership skill, of being too much of a buffoon- which was the subject of much hilarity in Charle Brooker’s 2017 Newswipe.
The Tories accuse him of being a radical leftists, even dangerous to the nation. His meeting with a Czechoslovakian spy in the 1980’s, prompted people to call him a communist informant. On the Andrew Mar show in 2015, he was asked whether he identifies himself as a Marxist, to which Corbyn replied that he ”hadn’t read enough Marx as he should have done.” While this is not an admission of being a Marxist, the fact that he couldn’t simply flat-out deny it is troubling, not because this means he’s hiding something, but because it betrays a deep misunderstanding of Marxism’s role in today’s troubled times.
In fact Marxism explains much of the polemic divide of the modern world. While the philosophical tenets of modern Russia owes more to Alexander Solzhenitsyn than to Karl Marx, his troubled legacy still haunts the nation. The Russian tactics of sowing ethnic and cultural divide through social-media were inspired by Soviet-tactics. In the fight against capitalism, Marx implored that deluding the proletariat, sometimes by heightening (or accelerating) the flaws of the Capitalistic system, is beneficial for the greater good. From this viewpoint, the legacy of spreading disinformation or as we now refer to it, fake news, can be found in the tenets of Marxism.
Under the guise of Marxism, liberty must be given away for the greater good. Its emphasis on the ”greater good” has all the frightening connotations. You can see the extreme-right demanding the loss of liberty under the preserving culture- instead of class-warfare the narrative becomes monoculturism vs. multiculturalism. On the extreme left spectrum, the loss of liberty means taking away the privileges of some to benefit the other- as was done in communism with property being taken and given to others. The world is a battle between two opposing forces. Marxism rids humans of their individualism and people become part of a collective- the good or the bad.
In the words of Marx himself: no great movement has ever been inaugurated without bloodshed.

Pictures of the Gulag

At the same time, we must admit the appeal of Marxism, especially in the aftermath of the Global Financial crisis. We’ve become aware of the ridiculous bonuses, the loopholes used to avoid paying taxes, the dirty financial practices used to hide massive sums of money.
Back when the horrors of the Soviet-experiment was revealed and the Labour party collapsed under the leadership of Harold Wilson, it was understandable why Thatcher’s brand of laissez-faire market economy was perceived as the only sane and humane alternative. Thatcher, like her US counterpart Reagan set the stage for the trickle-down economics that eventually showed its painful fragility in the 2007-2008 Global financial crisis.
And this is because the foundation of laissez-faire capitalism was based on a foolish dream. The idea that an unfettered free-market will cause inevitable stability and prosperity to its society and to its rightful participants- note how the emphasis on ‘rightful’ since this means this ideology means the destruction of the welfare state- is just as deluded as Marx’s dream of a communist utopia.

Reagan and Thatcher, purveyors of another false dream.

Despite what many Marxists will tell you, there has been serious attempt to making the Communist Utopia happen and not only did it fail, it has caused massive starvation and oppression unlike anything in history- and the price of ”trying” it again seems like an awful price to pay.
The point therefore is to advance a humane hybrid of both capitalism and socialism. But in order to do this, we need to learn from the past. In Marx’ Das Kapital we can read an excellent analysis and critique about the capitalist system. Much of what Marx wrote would transpire in the future. But beneath all this lies a milleniarist ideology that eventually inspired unprecedented genocide. Casual deflection on whether someone identifies as a Marxist should not be taken lightly.
There’s argument to be made that Corbyn’s refusal to denounce Marxism is purely out of political gain- to gain the loyalty of radical left voters. If that’s the case it would be just as egregious. But if anything could be said about Corbyn, is that despite his populist tendencies, there’s an authenticity to him, an idealism lacking modern British politicians. When he talks, it looks like he actually believes what he’s saying. There’s a lack of political-robotism in his presentation.
But sometimes idealism can be for the wrong thing. One could look at his weird admiration of Hugo Chavez. Chavez has been praised by left-wing-ideologues especially on the Hollywood side- if you want to see some shameful propaganda, watch Oliver Stone’s documentary South of the Border as well as mournful tribute to Hugo Chavez called Mi Amigo Hugo. Does Corbyn understand who Chavez was or has he fallen prey to ideological hubris? If one believes in one’s cause hard enough, one could easily ignore (or disbelieve) the countless human rights violations committed as a consequence of the cause.

The late Hugo Chavez: Does Corbyn understand who Chavez was or has he fallen prey to ideological hubris?

Milleniarist dreams are all about creating a brave new world- it also means destroying the old one. The forceful policies to make this happen, in the case of any communist regime in history, shows you the terrible toll this will have on human rights. The dream of Marx is dead and trying to revive it will only cause stagnation. It’s been dead for over a century now and it’s time for Marxists- if that happens to be Corbyn- to wake up.

The Redemption of Socialism

You can defend the virtues of socialism without harping back to Marxism. The only way to redeem socialism is by rejecting Marxism. You can state that you’ve grown to understand capitalism through the study of Marxism while also acknowledging that Marx’ historical materialism was wrong. You can expose wealth-inequality without espousing class warfare. The world is not divided between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. It’s not as simple as that and it’s important now as it has always been for our politicians to not divide the world in two.
In a world where large and small groups can huddle comfortably in their echo-chambers, where journalism and objective reality is in question and under attack, it’s only more important for our politicians to call out dangerous ideologies and the authoritarians that implement them.

Bernie Sanders, the U.S. Socialist populist. 

A political strain of humanitarian socialism is very effective and admittedly promising. A new form of politics is needed and some form of wealth-distribution is definitely going to be a part of it. Corbyn, like his American counterpart Bernie Sanders, has inspired many fringe voters. Whether this is due to Theresa May’s incompetence or due to the appeal of his message is up for debate, but what truly matters is that there is a definitive chance that Corbyn might be leading Britain in the next five years. And though there is little evidence of Corbyn charging the way for a violent Communist revolution, it doesn’t make his casual defense of Marxism any less revolting.
Above all its the principle. It’s about the respect for those who perished under communist rule and those who still suffer from its legacy. We should all know better by now.

***