Why Marxism Survives in the Academy

Right: Marxism. Left: the proletariat.

Why, given the obvious evidence that it simply does not work, despite the revelations about Stalin, the collapse of the Soviet Bloc, Tiananmen, and China’s abandonment of Marxist economics, does Marxism continue to dominate the Humanities and Social Sciences in university, the academy generally, the education world down to pre-school, journalism, publishing, and to a lesser extent all the professions?

Here’s one possible reason: because it is so clearly wrong.

This can make it useful for the same reason the educational theories taught in teacher’s colleges are always wrong.

Nobody could arrive at the support of Marxism based on either evidence, logic, or common sense. You therefore must be “educated” into it. Like some secret handshake, it justifies the education, and certifies that you have it.

More than that, by systematically embracing something any reasonably bright person can see is wrong, you are proving your loyalty to the group. They can be confident, if anything untoward is going on in your sight, in that profession, that you will not be one to blow whistles, lose then their sweet positions, and get them all in trouble. If you can swallow Marxism without flinching, you will swallow anything you are asked or told to do for the good of your class. You are a good German.

This leads to a further conclusion that may be useful: the more Marxism dominates a particular field, the more corrupt it is. This is strong evidence that whatever else that profession or school or brand is selling, is snake oil. To survive, they need to enforce some code of silence and loyalty.

And a further conclusion: those fields that are most Marxist currently are those most likely to be disrupted by new technology. It strongly suggests they are serving no useful purpose, are only preying on their fellows, and so can easily be bettered by laypeople or machines, or by nothing at all.