sometimes I feel I'm *too* into Marx. it's true, Marx was in fact wrong. Marx was wrong in many places, the tendency for the rate of profit to fall, his vulgar mechanistic materialism of historical materialism as well as the ableist asinine concept of the 'lumpenproletariat' ; not only is Marx wrong but he is also severely lacking in terms of further social critique, this was 2 centuries before people would seriously analytically think "hmmm, but what if like... black poor people have different issues to just poor people? what if like... there are intersections?". Marx never lays us out an example of what the FUCK to even do, defining communism in dialectical terms merely as the negation of capitalism, that's all well and good but Marx chief, WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?!?! and this comes back to his vulgar materialism, for Marx history is already set in stone, capitalism WILL just become communism eventually due to the instability of capitalism and the OONLY thing that can happen when capital collapses, to Marx, is communism. "We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things" literally just means "communism is just whatever comes after capitalism by negating it"

so why do I take a clearly too orthodox Marxist perspective at times compared to most? I'd have to say it's because, frankly, most nobody on the left has actually read and or engaged with marx and just doesn't *get it*. Marx is a wall, he's not easy to read and even his easy works were written literally 150 years ago in old German that was then translated into victorian English that isn't easy to read at all. not only that, but these ideas are HUGE concepts to understand, and so people misunderstand them entirely through learning via the grape vine in the most watered down ways. the fundamentalism of returning to Marx is in contrast of the revisionism of later Soviet and Maoist thinkers who completely became the anti-thesis to Marx, where Marx says X they do Y, where Marx says abolish this they retain it with trappings of 'the revolution', and so a return to Marx to start over with a new line of Marxists is, to me, far more useful.