Though it is full of fallacies, so-called Marxian “class” analysis still pervades much popular and political discourse. This divisive worldview unnecessarily exacerbates conflicts between groups (so-called “classes”) and is a convenient worldview for the political state because it empowers it to treat all differences between groups as moral inequities and “problems” to be solved by treating groups unequally in the name of equity, justice, and fairness.
Previously, I have written about Marx’s “class analysis” and what I call the “ideological fallacy”—if all argumentation is necessarily biased special pleading on behalf of one’s “class,” then Marxism itself is admitting non-objectivity as just another class-biased ideology. In that case, Marxism cannot be an objective science; or, if it claims that objective truth and persuasion through argument is possible between “classes,” class consciousness and analysis are bogus.
Whenever someone claims, “All people are slaves of ideological bias,” then they have two options—either their statement does apply to them (and is not to be trusted as objective), or it does not apply to them (and the theory is not true). The consistent arguer of ideological bias and Marxist class warfare is inviting you not to believe him either way! Additionally, if the Marxist arguer of ideological bias and class conflict truly believes what they argue—that no one can be convinced against their class interest and no one can objectively stand outside their ideology, then the logical conclusion is clear, “Shut up!” This is the error of polylogism, that is, the self-defeating argument that different groups of people (“classes”) have fundamentally different different logics. …
While proudly claiming to protect us from “class conflict,” the government and its beneficiaries are the ultimate privileged “classes” and creators of caste conflict. While on the perpetual and revolutionary quest to make every “class” equal (an impossibility), the political caste and its beneficiaries create and exacerbate caste distinctions while acting as neutral “rearrangers” of resources in order to reach “fairness” and “equality.” Unfortunately, many are still defrauded from Marx’s shell game.
It is interesting to see people separate class and caste and then see how Marx conflated the two to come up with his *class conflict” theories. These are the theories that the progressive/lefty/collectivist/Marxist/socialist/communist/murderers are now applying as intersectionality in class conflict. Marx did a bait and switch on definitions and applied the definition of caste to class and made his conclusion from that. It is just another way that Marx pulled his fraud on the world!