People ascribe far too much influence to Marx imo.
Discussion
I disagree. He was the paid mouthpiece, sure, but, it was his works that led to others being able to leverage his BS to kill more people than anything else in modern history that I'm aware of.
Marx had been dead for decades when the people learning on his works did their foul deeds.
Also, paid mouthpiece? For whom?
Decades don't matter to some people.
For the powers that should not be. I'll sound really nutty if I go into it too much, but, Marx was not acting on his own and was just another piece in a leather puzzle to enslave all of mankind.
It's not Marx per se but the school to which Marx belongs (prominently including Hegel and Plato)
Frankfurt school, queer, critical race theory, modern feminism and liberation theology are all heavily influenced by Marx
That may be, but Marx having been dead for almost 150 years means that he didn't have hand in the nonsense that has transpired in US, French and German academia for the past fifty years. Fx. The "queer" insanity arose principally with Michel Foucault and Judith Butler, much of whose "scholarly works" being halfway gibberish used to try to justify pederasty and assorted sexual transgressions.
That authors claim to base their "work" on a given previous author doesn't make it so. A significant part of recent humanities output is most dressed-up word-play that reaches for major names of the past as a crutch to support their quackery on.
The whole situation is an application of Marx's class struggle coupled with the Hegelian dialectic in order to push their perverse agenda. Marx focused on class, with an emphasis on economic class. The new Marxists are using the same methods but focusing on different classes in order to divide and conquer.
They are Marxists in more than name only - they implement the Praxis of Marxism - the revolutionary blueprint
Being big-mouthed jerks with fancy titles isn't being revolutionary, it's just being a jerk.
They are also revolutionaries. Loud-mouthed jerks are the means. The motive is still the same.
LOL! They are NOT revolutionaries! They had to redefine the word and twist everything on its head because literally none if them have an inch of the guts it takes to put everything on the line when most of them are living cushy middle-class lifestyles that never put them in danger or in danger of physical labor.
Not all revolutions are bloody
I'm not talking about those people. I'm talking about the ones who have been taking over public and now private institutions.
The champagne socialists really are socialists (in most cases, some are just passing to take their turn at the trough, but there's not much difference between that and the true believer)