Marx was a Jew who who despised the behavior of the most powerful members of his own people, and believed the only way for Jews to be free from persecution was, simplty, to stop acting like a bunch of Jews;
Except the problem with that is that the Jews did nothing wrong. Where shit went sideways, as far as I'm concerned from what I've seen, is that Jews would be an easily controllable immigrant group, that would be independently wealthy, and create a useful tax base for authoritarians. Then, when it became necessary for the authoritarian to secure his political power base, they'd refuse to pay their loans and pogrom the Jews. The problem, I think, lies within their religion, which supports an idea of paternalism. Paternalism makes people who are wealthy feel less guilty, but does nothing but craft dependency and promote resentment.
Most of the antisemitism that Marx is pushing isn't a ridiculous trope of Jews anyway. He sees Judaism as fundamentally Capitalist and vice-versa. Borrowing from Hitler for a moment, he is framing capitalism as effectively Judeo-Capitalism. That the worship of money, the deification of money, is a fundamentally and purely Jewish concept. This is why he called non-Jewish bankers and financiers "Internally Circumcised" in the same way that the Left uses the term "internalized misogyny".
If Marx were to be resurrected tomorrow, I honestly wonder if he wouldn't praise Hitler as a saint. His attitude toward Jews is practically mirrored in Mein Kampf.
I'd argue probably not, but not for the reasons we think.
Fascism seems to stem from "State Socialism" which, when Marx was alive, had significant arguments against Marxism. The fundamental disagreement was about where the role of the state lied within the revolution of the proletariat. The State Socialists argued against one of Marx's fundamental conclusions: that the dissolution of the state would ever happen.
They believed that the people would never effectively rise up by themselves within a system that was built to keep the proletariat oppressed. So, revolution had to be carried by revolutionaries who seized the state, and the state would be the embodiment of the proletarian revolution. And that furthermore: the idea of everyone embodying Marxist values couldn't ever happen, so the state needed to propagate Marxist values as the embodiment of the Revolution. The Dictatorship of The Proletariat, basically had to be the Dictatorship FOR The Proletariat.
Marx didn't ever like this, and didn't ever accept it, but if we are honest: they're right. This is why Marx continued up until his death as an author and agitator, but the State Socialists had become members of Bismark's cabinet. State Socialism became Fascism as they realized that in order for the people to be 'socialized' they needed to idealize and deify the state, and the National Socialists are simply a racial twist on that argument.
The State Socialists and the Fascists, honestly, took a more pragmatic approach to Socialism than Marx ever did, and it's why they were a bit more successful, and didn't devolve the way many Leftist & Bolshevist revolutions did. But they didn't embrace ant-Jewishness the way that the National Socialists did.
I don't know if Marx would praise Hitler as a "saint", but I get the feeling that Marx would be perfectly comfortable with National Socialism, and would congratulate Hitler for a job well done.
Except the problem with that is that the Jews did nothing wrong. Where shit went sideways, as far as I'm concerned from what I've seen, is that Jews would be an easily controllable immigrant group, that would be independently wealthy, and create a useful tax base for authoritarians. Then, when it became necessary for the authoritarian to secure his political power base, they'd refuse to pay their loans and pogrom the Jews. The problem, I think, lies within their religion, which supports an idea of paternalism. Paternalism makes people who are wealthy feel less guilty, but does nothing but craft dependency and promote resentment.
Most of the antisemitism that Marx is pushing isn't a ridiculous trope of Jews anyway. He sees Judaism as fundamentally Capitalist and vice-versa. Borrowing from Hitler for a moment, he is framing capitalism as effectively Judeo-Capitalism. That the worship of money, the deification of money, is a fundamentally and purely Jewish concept. This is why he called non-Jewish bankers and financiers "Internally Circumcised" in the same way that the Left uses the term "internalized misogyny".
I'd argue probably not, but not for the reasons we think.
Fascism seems to stem from "State Socialism" which, when Marx was alive, had significant arguments against Marxism. The fundamental disagreement was about where the role of the state lied within the revolution of the proletariat. The State Socialists argued against one of Marx's fundamental conclusions: that the dissolution of the state would ever happen.
They believed that the people would never effectively rise up by themselves within a system that was built to keep the proletariat oppressed. So, revolution had to be carried by revolutionaries who seized the state, and the state would be the embodiment of the proletarian revolution. And that furthermore: the idea of everyone embodying Marxist values couldn't ever happen, so the state needed to propagate Marxist values as the embodiment of the Revolution. The Dictatorship of The Proletariat, basically had to be the Dictatorship FOR The Proletariat.
Marx didn't ever like this, and didn't ever accept it, but if we are honest: they're right. This is why Marx continued up until his death as an author and agitator, but the State Socialists had become members of Bismark's cabinet. State Socialism became Fascism as they realized that in order for the people to be 'socialized' they needed to idealize and deify the state, and the National Socialists are simply a racial twist on that argument.
The State Socialists and the Fascists, honestly, took a more pragmatic approach to Socialism than Marx ever did, and it's why they were a bit more successful, and didn't devolve the way many Leftist & Bolshevist revolutions did. But they didn't embrace ant-Jewishness the way that the National Socialists did.
I don't know if Marx would praise Hitler as a "saint", but I get the feeling that Marx would be perfectly comfortable with National Socialism, and would congratulate Hitler for a job well done.