The Appeal of Marxism and Communism: Think of Communism as an Addictive Drug Produced by Marxist Ideology

In my book Pedagogy of the Depressed, I really sought to understand the appeal of Marxism – especially in our younger generation such as Millennials and younger (born 1980-2000). The appeal of Marxism in generations such as Millennials and GenZ is not a simple understanding, given that it takes a deep dive into the historical events in the lives of Millennials and GenZ. In my book, I outlined three key ideals that these ‘young Marxists’ have related to today’s events.

1. Resentment for the historical material life they live.
2. Arrogance from peers and themselves about logical outcomes of the world.
3. A heavy burden of class-based guilt is common with kids entering university – considering if they are paying tuition, they would not be considered ‘burdened by class’.

What does each one of these concepts mean? Resentment for their historical material life comes from the many news articles that – in some form or another – suggest the phrase “generations today will have less than their parents”. For one, I would agree with the statement that Millennials are less successful in comparison to their parental counterparts at similar points in life. Not from a 10,000-foot high on OxyCommie, but a grounded look is needed to look at all the factors.

Young Resentment

Yes, since the 2008 Economic/Housing crash Millennials have taken the brunt, graduating from college and entering a market with high unemployment, and few jobs given generational diversity in the workforce. Generational diversity in the fact that baby boomers are still working in jobs and not retiring at the regular 55, 60, or even 65. Naturally, this produces fewer opportunities for individuals to get jobs (simple economic law of scarcity), and there are competing ideas as to why baby boomers are still prevalent in the workplace: (1) they were/are irresponsible with money and need to work to cater to their inflated lives. (2) They were also hurt by the 2008 crash, given a lot of their 401K and mutual funds were tied into the market – losing their retirement savings.

Oddly enough, evidence can find both to be true at the anecdotal level, in turn, this provides challenges for being a logical outcome considering the vagaries of the content. It presents a challenging outcome – (1) is 100% the boomer’s fault, (2) is 100% not the boomer’s fault, and the fault of a larger system. Regardless of the outcome, it produces economic resentment in a younger generation, solely from the fact that baby boomers are blocking out younger generations on access to gain capital. Regardless of the outcome, younger generations are resentful and confused as to who is actually causing their economic problems. Deep down, a millennial wants the American Dream: house, wife/husband, and kids, but it is increasingly more challenging to obtain these things.

So, they turn to the opiate of the masses, have it be communism, socialism, or Marxism – a base tenet is the abolishment of private property. “If I can’t have it, neither can you” seems to be the feeling younger generations have, in a sort of expectation that they are failing to meet, by no fault of their own. However, is this true? In an article by Raymond Matthews, a UCSB poli-sci major, references Illinois State University Professor Andrew Hartman, who suggests “Marxist Booms” have been prevalent in America when in times of economic downturn and financial angst, coming from lacking job prospects, an 8.8% unemployment rate, and higher education costs.

I won’t get too much into what caused this economic crash, as the main culprit was excessive mortgage lending to borrowers, who would commonly not qualify for a home loan, causing a cascade of mortgage defaults. But again, it brings in some interesting psycho-social questions, such as, did these people who took on these mortgages honestly think they deserved to own a home? Well sure they may have been able to own a home, but a new 2000 sq. foot house in an extremely desirable neighborhood, on a salary netting 65k a year? No wonder there were so many defaults considering finding an extra $1800 a month is not easy when two individuals with jobs grossing 40K a year.

People of all generations were greedy with homes in 2008, and the concept of biting off more than you can chew is not a new phenomenon affecting current generations, this has always been the case. Most people had to obtain full-time work at a decent job to pay for their first two-bedroom, one-bathroom starter home. Never forget, most boomer parents entered a housing market with 13% interest rates, even by today’s standards that is unheard of; however, no one can deny neoliberal policies of the late 20^th, and early 21^st century caused issues for millennials today. So, the answer, what I feel falls somewhere in the middle, are younger generations justified in their resentment? Yes and no.

Arrogance about Labor

The housing issue brings up some interesting questions. Are these younger generations benevolent to Marxism/Communism authentically, or do they support Marxism/Communism because of their jealousy toward their inability to make themselves vendible in the free market? This blends into the arrogance of peers or themselves about the logical outcomes of the world. I said this quote before, much to the ire of many Marxists/Communists calling me every name in the book, but I do feel their arrogance is based on this situational idea.

You don’t own your labor, you own ability and talent, and the market decides if it is labor.

If you have read even just a little bit of Marxist work, you would recognize the theory around labor and that the proletariat must seize control of labor over the bourgeoisie (main tenet of Marxism). Since this is a key area of Marxism, it needs an origins story, in that the proletariat is the one who always owned the labor, as in doing the work, it was the bourgeoises that stole the labor and exploited the proletariat for their gain. I argue that you have not – nor never have – owned your labor, if you did you would be deciding what labor is in the marketplace, thus the bourgeoises you so fervently hate.

One argument that has been levied against my previous statement is “ability, talent, labor, it’s all the same, you’re just playing semantics.” Again, no I am not, considering even in my statement I outline the difference between talent and labor. Talent is what you can do, or do well, labor is the exchange for the talent generated by the market. For example, a guitarist has talent and can play a multitude of songs with clarity and soul. The guitarist has talent. Whether people want to watch this guitarist play and pay to watch the guitarist play makes it labor. Even if money is not involved, just the act of the market taking the time out of their day to watch someone play guitar makes it labor to the guitarist. It is the market forces playing an active role in your talent.

Now, let’s do this example with a factory worker. The factory workers can say they own their labor, through things like collective bargaining, but what happens when the company goes belly-up because of a bad product? Do you still own your labor then? No, either directly or indirectly, you made a product that did not resonate in the market; thus, your talent is still a talent to make a product, but it is useless as labor if it is not playing an active role in the marketplace.

The Personality Disorder of Class-Based Guilt

The last point relates to class-based guilt, which is an interesting concept to unpack. What do we mean by class-based guilt? Simply, it is the guilt a person has for the class they are a part of, and benefit from. One example is in universities, predominantly Canadian universities, that employ indigenous land acknowledgment in any way they can, without actually giving back the land or ceding it in any shape or form. This makes all land acknowledgments sound like this.

Indigenous land acknowledgments — translated.

Here is land
This was your land
It is now our land
We will not give back the land
But we acknowledge it was your land
Now I feel better

– White Liberal

— 𝑪.𝑾. 𝑩𝒂𝒃𝒊𝒄𝒉 (@CWBabich) August 8, 2022

One can see this form of class-based guilt as some form of personality disorder. Allan Epstein of Reason Magazine was salient about this back in 1978, discussing the manipulation of guilt as a political tool. Epstein examines how political and social elites exploit feelings of guilt in society to advance their agendas and consolidate their power. He argues further that guilt is used to silence dissent, control behavior, and promote policies that might not otherwise be accepted. Epstein suggests that this phenomenon can lead to a culture of self-censorship and conformity, inhibiting open discourse and critical thinking. Furthermore, emphasizes the importance of recognizing and challenging this manipulation of guilt to maintain a healthy democratic society.

What is interesting is that this was written in 1978 and is so important to today’s feeling of a younger generation. For example, take a look at the climate change debate. A certain class of people – usually young, white, liberal, and affluent – would scoff at the notion that you would even call it a debate: “Climate change is real and it is an existential threat to humanity.” Even though there is evidence to the contrary from many experts such as Richard Lindzen (MIT professor), Judith Curry (former Georgia Tech Climatologist), Ian Plimer (Geologist), and Steve Koonin (Physicist). Not to mention a clear breakdown of the existential climate threat fallacy. But again, this class-based guilt is not just a psychological feeling, it is a tool to stifle debate on a topic. This goes toward the agenda of policy promotion, which Epstein describes as framing a policy issue in terms of moral responsibility, politicians and leaders can appeal to people’s sense of duty and humanity, making it more likely for them to support policies that they may not fully understand or agree with.

Class-based guilt is not a new concept and strongly relates to the framework of Jung’s Shadow relating to the hidden unconscious personality types that can be manifested toward other people to protect one’s self from harm for undesirable or socially unacceptable beliefs. It can be found in:

1. Suppression and Projection: Just as individuals repress their darker or less socially acceptable traits into the unconscious, political and social elites can use guilt to suppress certain viewpoints or dissenting opinions that challenge their narratives.
2. Collective Shadows: Just as individuals have personal shadows, societies, and groups also have collective shadows. Epstein’s analysis of guilt manipulation can be seen as a societal-level projection of collective guilt onto certain issues or individuals.
3. Cultural Conditioning: Both concepts touch on the idea of cultural conditioning and its impact on behavior. Epstein’s analysis suggests that guilt can be used as a tool to condition societal behaviors and opinions, while Jung’s Shadow theory points out how societal norms and values can lead to the suppression of certain aspects of the self.

In many ways, what Epstein calls for is to confront the unconscious – as in confronting the manipulative use of guilt – requires confidence to call out these class-based guilt forms. Again, one can wonder how Communist/Marxist policy came into the minds of younger/naïve individuals, this is perhaps the best explanation.

In my opinion, class-based guilt is akin to mental illness, and self-awareness is the tool to help cure mental illness. Since the basis of Marxism/Communism is all about the collective – this too consists of a mental illness of the collective, or a mass formation psychosis (a la Mathias Desmet) that has infected younger generations.

Communism as an Addictive Drug – Produced by Marxism

The drug OxyCommie feels good and takes away the pain at the beginning of your journey, such as finding answers to your life, understanding the world around you through simple power dynamics, repenting for your class-based guilt, and channeling your shadow urges toward something meaningful and useful, and fight opposing opinions through shame and guilt. Again, this is not a new concept, the OxyCommie epidemic has happened throughout history. Just refresh your memory about the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, or the cultural revolution in China in 1949 – People were feeling good about the prospects of taking away pain through policy, and the individuals who could do it were considered gods of their own making, to help the people of their countries.

Unfortunately, it never stays that way, you get the sickness and withdrawal symptoms once OxyCommie doesn’t work as it used to. You get The Holodomor (Great Famine) from 1932-1933 which saw anywhere from 3-7 million deaths in 1 year. Or you can have The Great Chinese Famine from 1959-1961 which saw a death toll of up to 36 million men, women, and children. What both famines had in common is that they were an outgrowth of policy implementation by Communist/Marxist leaders at the time. A systematic murder of civilians directly related to Marxist/Communist policies.

There is the potential for hope; however, according to Chris Cutrone – adjunct associate professor at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago – sees the fall of Millennial Marxism as an outcome of dire predictions not coming to fruition based on the 2008 economic crash. We can chalk this up to a young/rebellious phase of one’s life.

“Marxism today has no goal to work toward, but serves only as a reminder that there once was a purpose, a purpose to capitalism, in socialism. Without an existing struggle for socialism, Marxism has no purpose. Without the purpose of socialism, there is no Marxism.”

Ultimately, Marxist ideas and their outgrowths of communism and socialism don’t have the market capital they once had. I would argue they never had it, but that is for a different discussion. The ethos around this new-age millennial Marxism is pure self-stimulating virtue signaling without a foundation in the real world. Another way of looking at it is lost drug addicts looking for their next socio-cultural high.