The Failure of Marxism and Globalism
Philosophically, Marxism, Socialism, and Communism are something which resembles a religion in of itself, and for its true believers, provide a comprehensive way of life to interpret the world around them.
Although Marxists identify as materialists and atheists, rejecting the existence of a supernatural God, they do believe in the inevitable dialectic of class struggle and the changing material conditions that drive historical progress. In this sense, these dialectical forces serve as their invisible hand or their “God,” influencing humanity since the start of history.
And if we look at how Marxism manifested in the 20th century, the Marxist have their own dogma: it has its sacred texts (such as Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto), its saints and martyrs (like Lenin, Stalin, Che, and Castro), and its heretics (Revisionists and Trotskyists). There are also calls to evangelize the world (“spread world revolution”), to have party headquarters akin to churches, political secretaries acting like clergy, schisms like the Sino-Soviet split, and oaths to join the party resembling baptisms.
Furthermore, the theme of Marxism and religion shares the same themes of the loss of paradise, living in a corrupted world, and the promise of the return of an ideal future. The fall of man and the paradise lost described in the Bible, resembles the concept of primitive Communism lost due to changing material conditions, the loss of communion with God is akin to the lack of “Class consciousness” among workers after alienation, and the promise of the return of Jesus and going to heaven seems similar to the promise of Communism being established in the future.
In China’s case, the introduction of Marxism to China was not 100% positive. Chinese Communists damaged many of China’s historic memories and traditional values from 1949 to 1979, and Marxism never provided an answer to the non material needs of the Chinese.
In addition, the moral relativism of Marxism is extremely problematic. Marxism emphasizes that morality and ethics are shaped by material conditions and the socio-economic context of a given time. This perspective suggests that what is considered “right” or “wrong” can evolve as society’s material realities change. Even some Marxist today argue that concepts as basic as the family can be redefined. Oftentimes, this idea is taken by people and taken to extremes. The fluidity of morals and ethics is antagonistic to the concept of the Truth, which the Chinese culture suggests is fundamentally objective.
Therefore, Marxism is a foreign introduction into China and its concepts are generally alien to the Chinese mentality. The Chinese put up with Marxism due to the adaptation of Marxism to the Chinese civilization in the recent decades. Since the 1980s, Beijing has walked a very fine line between balancing Marxism and the Chinese civilization. One one hand, Beijing acknowledges that mistakes exist and that there were errors committed in the past. Since 2013, Beijing has made great strides in the restoration of the classical Chinese culture and spirit. However, on the other hand, Beijing does not wish to criticize Marxism too harshly, on the fear of unnecessarily causing social disturbances.
Meanwhile, “Globalism”, which is the political concepts that the United States led West push for is neo liberalism. Globalism sees liberalism as the “end of history” as defined by Francis Fukuyama — that all nations must achieve the universal liberal values of human rights and a market economy to be considered democratic. The word “democratic” is used in the context of neo liberals like how the imperialists in the 19th century would use the word “civilized”. In both cases, the terms often carry an implicit sense of superiority or a justification for imposing certain values or systems on others.
Marxism is Globalism of another degree, but calls to spread “workers revolution” around the globe, based on its own interpretation of history. Both claim to be universal.
Since Liberalism won the Cold War and is the dominant power; it can be said that in the 21st century there is no “left” and “right,” only those who oppose the status quo and those who support it.
China, the Russian Federation, Iran, and their allies in the developing world derive from different social, political religious and economic systems, but all opposes the status quo. The USA, Ukraine, Taiwan, EU, and its allies support the status quo.
So the entire concept “left” vs “right” is now outdated. The emerging global conflict centers around two viewpoints: the first advocates for the recognition of multiple civilizational experiences and existences, promoting the equal coexistence among all civilizations — such as China, Russia, the USA, Western Europe, Latin America, and Africa — each with its own unique values, religions, cultures, political systems, and histories. In contrast, the other side supports globalism, aiming for a unified world governed by a single ideology; and the submission to the end of history.
