Marx - ISM

Originally published on Substack.

In a recent conversation on Jay Shapiro’s podcast, Jay sat down with Garrett Halas, a Marxist educator and organizer.

The discussion was revealing, but not for the reasons dogmatic partisans might think. It offered a case study in what happens when an analytical framework stops being an instrument of inquiry and turns into a personal identity.

For most of my life, I rejected Marx because I was taught to instinctively dismiss him based on standard arguments. And in truth, anyone would have to be blind not to see the historical record. Some of the most repressive regimes stamped his face on prison walls, labor camps, and state propaganda banners. Millions of human beings suffered and died under states claiming his legacy. When we see an idea wrapped around a machine of mass surveillance, forced labor, and political tyranny, rejecting it is a normal response.

Listening to this interview brought that exact tension back to the surface. It made me uncomfortable, not because the critiques of Western corporate capitalism were wrong, but because the moment the conversation touched on actual state violence, the analysis shifted to the familiar language of religious apologetics.

Jay asked all the right questions because he refused to stay inside the theoretical sandbox. He pulled the discussion out of academic abstraction and forced Garrett to confront tangible human realities and glaring contradictions. That pressure exposed the deeper problem.

When an idea stops being a tool we test and becomes who we are, honest inquiry stops. Any contradiction in the theory stops being something to explore and starts feeling like an attack on who we are.

At that point, the mind retreats into endless mental gymnastics. We get caught arguing over this politician or that faction, this compromise or that betrayal. We spin infinite justifications in our heads to explain why things went wrong, always blaming the specific leader, the temporary crisis, or the wrong implementation. We do whatever it takes to protect the belief itself from collapsing, so we never have to look at the foundation.

In the interview, this dynamic unfolds in real time:

• The return of the priesthood: Everything suddenly becomes too complex for ordinary people to understand. We suddenly need academic interpreters who argue over who knows the holy texts best to explain why the obvious reality in front of our eyes is not what it seems.

• The moving goalposts: Every failure or contradiction gets dismissed as an unfinished order of operations. The state is just biding its time. It is a transitional phase on a long march. The actual arrival of liberation is always pushed just over the horizon, forever out of reach.

• The new class: The party crowns itself the sole voice of the people. Anyone who dissents or points out state abuses gets categorized as the enemy. The hierarchy does not disappear. The old ruling class simply gets replaced by a new bureaucratic elite that rules over the people in the name of the people.

• Rationalizing the machine: When pressed on tangible human costs, real people were reduced to economic statistics and test cases. The human rights costs, the silencing of dissent, and the expansion of total digital surveillance get romanticized as necessary administrative steps.

A centralized state built on secret police, biometric tracking, and the crushing of independent thought does not voluntarily dissolve itself. An apparatus of coercion only knows how to expand and protect its own survival.

Karl Marx was an exceptional diagnostician of the survival matrix. But treating his diagnosis as a sacred doctrine produces the exact religious dogma and oppression he warned against. The mistake so many people make is falling into a false binary. They see the deep rot of Western corporate oligarchy, the corruption, the hollowed out communities, and the economic precarity, and they think the only alternative is Eastern state authoritarianism. Neither side truly questions the industrial machine itself. Both believe that more forceful control and separation can manufacture human liberation, completely ignoring rooted, indigenous truths about how human beings actually live in balance with life.

If we have gone through the process of deconstructing Zionism, this pattern looks instantly familiar. Deconstructing that system taught many of us how an ideology captures the human mind. Following that inquiry all the way down forces us to deconstruct Marxism too. Many people waking up to the reality of Palestine run straight into Marxist spaces because they accurately identify deeper sources of systemic oppression. But trading one totalizing ideology for another is not liberation. We do not break the grip of one state cult by converting to another. That hesitation felt when hearing the dogma, the academic jargon, and the defense of Eastern police states is healthy. We do not need to join a tribe or adopt an ism to understand how capital and power work.

The rest of this essay breaks down:

• The survival trap made simple: What Marx actually diagnosed about our material matrix.

• The religious distortion: How tools of liberation get converted into state religions to distort reality, protect power, and trap us in endless cycles of conversion.

• The modern testing lab: A systems level breakdown of Shenzhen, China, as an example.

• The connection to Palestine

To read the rest of the breakdown, you can download the remaining sections here:

Or subscribe as a member on Substack to read this piece and access the full archive.