We Need a Clean Break with The Left

Most leftists proudly identify as anti-capitalists. They fervently believe that they stand against the very core of the capitalist system, many claiming this is what distinguishes them from liberals. Yet, despite their passionate rhetoric and earnest intentions, the left’s ideology has always been deeply rooted in bourgeois interests. This contradiction directs them away from the primary issue within capitalism, ensuring that they will never truly address it.

Historically, the left emerged as a revolutionary force against feudalism, advocating for change and progress. However, in the context of a capitalist society, the left’s role has shifted. No matter the ideals they champion or the injustices they condemn, the left’s underlying ideology diverts focus from challenging the capitalist system at its core.

We must confront the reality that the left, as it exists today, perpetuates the very structures it claims to oppose. Today I want to discuss why, drawing on my upcoming documentary, Horseshoe Theory is Right, But Not How You Think.

The Bourgeois Foundations of the Left

The origins of the left/right political spectrum can be traced back to the French Revolution; representatives of the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy physically sat on opposite sides in the National Assembly. Those who supported the bourgeoisie sat on the left, while those who wanted to preserve the monarchy and the old aristocratic order sat on the right. This division was not merely symbolic but deeply reflective of the material interests of different classes.

During the revolutionary period, the left was seen as a force for change, advocating for “liberty, equality, and fraternity.” These ideals resonated with the emerging bourgeoisie, who sought to overthrow the old feudal structures and establish their own dominance. In this context, the left played a crucial role in promoting the interests of the bourgeois class.

Karl Marx's analysis in “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon” provides further insight into this dynamic. Marx describes how the bourgeoisie, after initially championing revolutionary ideals to gain power, quickly abandoned these principles once their class interests were secured.

The constitution, the National Assembly, the dynastic parties, the blue and red republicans… the thunder from the platform, the sheet lightning of the daily press, the entire literature, the political names and the intellectual reputations, the civil law and the penal code, “liberté, egalité, fraternité” […] all have vanished.

- Karl Marx, “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon,” (1852)

In “The Eighteenth Brumaire,” Marx details how the bourgeoisie manipulated political movements and ideologies to consolidate their power, betraying the ideals that had brought them to prominence. This betrayal is a recurring theme in the history of the left. Once the bourgeoisie achieved dominance, their revolutionary rhetoric gave way to preserving their newly acquired status – the material interests of the class from which the left arose. The bourgeoisie’s role shifted from a radical force for change to a mechanism for maintaining the capitalist system.

Leftists might claim to oppose the existing structures through various forms of obfuscation, but their actions often reveal a different story. They are quick to believe narratives propagated by the State Department over the representatives of actually existing socialist countries. They emphasize behavior as the primary driver of social change, leading to infighting and attacks on one another rather than focusing on class contradictions or criticizing the bourgeoisie directly and specifically.

But leftists profess to hate the bourgeoisie! Yet, when discussions arise about monopoly and finance capital, they are quick to label such talk as anti-Semitic, even when no reference to Jewish people has been made (when talking about class, ethnicity is irrelevant). This misdirection serves to protect the very class interests they claim to oppose, illustrating the deep-rooted contradictions and inefficacies within leftist ideology.

The left’s basis in bourgeois ideology prevents it from addressing capitalism's fundamental contradictions, rendering it, at best, ineffective in achieving its stated goals and, at worst, a means to derail any critique or dissent the ruling order faces.

---

The Left’s Role in Maintaining Capitalist Structures

Today, the left enthusiastically continues to operate within the confines of bourgeois ideology. This is evident in its focus on identity politics and cultural issues, which divert attention from capitalism's defining contradiction (the socialization of production while retaining individual appropriation). The left protects the bourgeoisie from a unified class challenge by emphasizing lines not drawn based on where power comes from.

Focusing on isolated issues such as gender, race, and sexual orientation without linking them to the broader context of class struggle diverts attention from the material conditions that perpetuate all forms of oppression. These issues, while important, are deeply intertwined with economic exploitation and cannot be fully resolved in isolation. By treating them as separate from the primary economic contradiction, the left dilutes its efforts and allows the systemic roots of these issues to remain unchallenged.

This compartmentalization also fosters an environment of virtue signaling and moral superiority within leftist circles. The focus shifts to changing opinions on specific groups or language use rather than addressing power structures. This emphasis creates divisions among potential allies and alienates those who might otherwise support genuine change. Such fragmentation prevents the development of a coherent strategy capable of challenging the capitalist order. The left’s preoccupation with displays of virtuous behavior takes precedence over tackling systemic issues, significantly undermining its effectiveness.

Moreover, the left’s emphasis on individualism over collective action and material interests reveals its alignment with bourgeois values. Ironically, the left is often associated with collectivism, yet this is rarely true in practice (also, no movement should exclusively emphasize individual or collective; both are important in different contexts). Even in the struggle most aesthetically linked to the left—the liberation of sexual and gender minorities (a worthwhile pursuit!)—the focus is on continually fragmenting demographics (“2SLGBTQIA+”) rather than uniting under a single banner. This fragmentation is symbolized by the ever-evolving flag, constantly adding new symbols and patterns to the rainbow, which originally represented the full spectrum. This approach leads to actions that are often counterproductive or even self-destructive.

Friedrich Engels detailed this in 1880’s “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific,” so it is far from new. Who he called “utopian” socialists made the mistake of focusing on abstract ideals and moral appeals rather than the material conditions and class relations that shape society. Engels emphasized that true socialism must be grounded in an analysis of material conditions and class struggle, rather than idealistic.

Many of the utopian socialists Engels criticized were capitalists themselves. This is not a moral judgment, as they used their money to fund interesting and well-intentioned experiments that ultimately couldn't succeed because they failed to excavate and address the underlying contradictions. Regardless, this exemplifies the left’s alignment with bourgeois interests – both then and now, it ultimately serves to maintain the structures of power it claims to oppose.

---

Reclaiming Class Consciousness

To move beyond the limitations of contemporary leftist ideology, it is crucial to understand the pitfalls of a movement built on identifying as something specific—whether “a leftist,” “progressive,” or any other label (even “class conscious”).

Movements built on strong identification with labels often prioritize maintaining these identities, becoming a fandom or club. This focus can lead to fragmentation and infighting as different factions compete for ideological purity and recognition. Instead of uniting under a common cause, individuals and groups are divided by their adherence to specific labels, weakening the overall movement and diverting attention from the larger goal of systemic change.

But it is not enough to reject labels; we must cultivate genuine class consciousness! Class consciousness is not something we can simply claim to possess, nor is it a label we can adopt. Identifying as class-conscious is irrelevant and nonsensical. Class consciousness can only truly be about understanding and acting on the material conditions and power dynamics that shape our lives. It involves recognizing the common interests of the working class and organizing collectively to address those interests.

Reclaiming class consciousness requires a shift away from the fragmented, identity-based approach currently dominating leftist (or really any) activism. Yes, building a unified, class-conscious movement involves fostering solidarity among diverse groups within the working class. This means recognizing and addressing different groups’ unique challenges, but without sacrificing emphasis on similarity and shared interests.

A class-conscious movement is, whether intellectually or intuitively, grounded in a material analysis of society and its relationships to power.

In practice, this could involve organizing around issues that directly impact the working class, such as labor rights, living wages, affordable housing, and access to healthcare. It means building alliances with labor unions, worker cooperatives, and other organizations that are rooted in the material interests of workers. It also involves using education and outreach to raise awareness of class issues and to build a broad-based movement that can challenge the capitalist system.

But it doesn’t involve simply picking a side in an election and “pushing them left.”

---

Conclusion

When leftists genuinely express their anger and exasperation, I try not to judge. But when they endlessly refuse to learn, I believe that is because they are inculcated against actual class consciousness by ideologies one can identify as.

This gives people an identity and a community, which are tempting in today's atomized world.

But to genuinely address capitalism’s flaws and move to a higher stage of society, we must recognize that the leftist worldview is inherently flawed. The focus on identity politics, virtue signaling, and fragmentation diverts attention from the fundamental economic contradictions at capitalism’s heart, perpetuating the structures it seeks to dismantle.

Engels’ critique of utopian socialism remains relevant today. It reminds us that true socialism must be grounded in a scientific analysis of material conditions and class struggle.

Reclaiming class consciousness involves recognizing the working class's shared material interests and organizing collectively to address those interests. It means building solidarity across diverse groups and focusing on concrete actions that challenge the structures of power. By dropping the labels and embracing a unified, class-conscious approach, we can build something that may one day be capable of confronting capitalism’s root causes and achieving lasting change.