Skip to main content

With the electoral rise of the DSA and the conversations churning around Marxism and Socialism, it’s worth noting that it turns out the original guy living off his parents and building a whole ideology to avoid getting a job predates the meme by about 190 years.

Before Karl Marx became the patron saint of every dorm-room revolutionary with a mommy-and-daddy-funded gap year, he was, by his own father’s account, a loser twentysomething who couldn’t manage an allowance.

Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Pledge your support

While studying at the Universities of Bonn and Berlin in the 1830s, Marx lived on a generous annual stipend from his father, Heinrich, a successful lawyer. A “nice middle-class income” at the time ran around 300 thalers a year. Even the richest students of the era, Heinrich wrote, spent under 500. Karl spent almost 700 – in a single year – on nothing his father could identify. “As if we were men of wealth,” Heinrich wrote to his son, “my Herr Son disposed in one year of almost 700 talers contrary to all agreement, contrary to all usage, whereas the richest spend less than 500.” He wasn’t calling his son a common thief or wastrel, exactly: “I do him the justice of saying that he is no rake, no squanderer,” Heinrich allowed, but sounded like a father who has run out of angrier words to try. Heinrich Marx was calling out something else, something more contemporary-sounding: a young man who treated his family’s money as an ambient resource, always there, never worth tracking, an entitlement rather than a gift.

The overspending wasn’t a one-time youthful stumble. Karl ran up debts during his student years that required his father to step in and pay them off directly, on the condition that Karl transfer to the more “sedate” University of Berlin – a 19th-century version of Dad-calling-the-dean. When Karl, in the midst of all this, wrote home describing himself as “torn” and unhappy, Heinrich’s patience finally cracked in a letter that reads like it could’ve been posted to a subreddit about entitled adult children today: “I hate this modern expression – ‘torn’ – used by weaklings if they are disgusted with life merely because they cannot get without effort beautifully furnished palaces, elegant carriages, and millions in the bank.” Translated out of 1830s German syntax: stop being sad that you can’t have everything for free, and go get a #*%!ing job.

Marx never really did. Heinrich died in 1838, and with him went the allowance, the safety net, and – not incidentally – the parent most inclined to actually confront his son about money. Marx’s biography for the next four decades is a long, unbroken record of financial dependency, just redirected onto new benefactors: occasional inheritances from his mother’s side (money she reportedly tried to steer toward paying off his creditors directly, having presumably learned something from her husband’s letters), and above all, the lifelong, extensive financial support of Friedrich Engels – heir to a family that owned textile factories, which is to say: the actual capitalist enterprise Marx spent his career theorizing should be overthrown, quietly bankrolling the theorist for most of his adult life.

It’s worth remembering this origin story now, because the ideology it produced hasn’t exactly stayed in the 19th century. The Democratic Socialists of America has grown from a graying debate club of a few thousand members a decade ago into an organization north of 120,000, with more than 250 members holding elected office nationwide as of this year – including a sitting member of Congress and a big-city mayor. Marx’s core complaint, dressed up in updated vocabulary, is still the engine: someone else’s productive labor is owed to you, and resenting the people who built it is a political program rather than a personality flaw. It worked out well enough for its founder to get 2,500 pages and a beard on a coffee mug. It’s still working, a century and a half later, on people who’ve never once had to explain a 700-thaler bar tab to their father.

There’s a version of this story that’s been sanded down by a century and a half of ideological reverence into something noble: the penniless philosopher, exiled and impoverished, sacrificing material comfort for the sake of the working class. But behind the scenery of the mythology the actual documentary record (read: reality) reveals his own father’s letters – preserved and archived, not by hostile critics but by Marxist archivists themselves – and a far less flattering throughline. Here was a young man who never developed the ordinary adult competency of living within his means, who treated the wealth generated by his family’s actual productive labor as an entitlement rather than a resource, who was rescued from the consequences of his own spending again and again by people who loved him, and who spent the rest of his life being subsidized by the son of a factory owner while writing that factory owners were the problem.

It is the ultimate irony that the philosophy that indicted the bourgeoisie for extracting unearned value from other people’s labor was authored, funded, and sustained almost entirely by unearned value extracted from other people’s labor: his father’s law practice, his mother’s inheritance, and Friedrich Engels’ factories. Marx didn’t escape the system he criticized… he never stopped needing it to carry him. He just never learned to say thank you for it, and instead wrote 2,500 pages arguing that the people paying his bills were the villains of history.

A central tenet of capitalism is that reward follows hard work; what you put into building something is what you ought to get out of it. Since Marx wasn’t too crazy about the building or working part, but still felt he was entitled to reap the benefits of other people’s hard work, shouldn’t that disqualify Das Kapital and Marx himself from weighing in on something to which he was so overtly averse? Is he really their best mascot?

Every dorm-room revolutionary hanging a Marx poster next to their unpaid parking tickets and their parents’ Venmo requests should probably know the man they’re quoting invented an entire theory of history rather than just get a job – and somehow made it look like your fault for noticing. So the next time someone tells you to read Das Kapital as a defense for why Democratic Socialism is a thing, or quotes Marx at you from the couch their parents are still paying for, remind them: the original freeloader already tried this. He just had better branding.

Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Pledge your support

Sofia is a patriot polymath contributor. She travels with the First Fleet, and I am in a rowboat. She is also a Brownstone author and an activist in California who worked closely with publisher Tony Lyons and Robert F. Kennedy Jr on several projects, including Kennedy’s best-selling book: The Real Anthony Fauci. She collaborates with several organizations in the legal, legislative, medical science, and literary spaces, and she is co-founder of Spirit of 1776, which is building strategic infrastructure for the course correction in the form of fortifying human protections against interventions of all kinds and, under that tent, building the parallel alternatives for communities to thrive.

Sofia is a co-founder of Free Now Foundation, a non-profit preserving medical freedom and children’s health, the creator and host of the Patriot Network news show 4th Branch, the founder and treasurer of the Common Sense SuperPAC which supported Robert Kennedy’s bid for President, and the founder and current treasurer of the Decentralize America PAC, which focuses on legislative and judicial initiatives, grassroots lobbying, and supporting common sense candidates in both state and federal elections who focus on winding back corporate capture and corruption at all levels of government.

Subscribe to her HERE to get more content like this.

This is outside my usual hangout, but I hope you appreciate it. We are walking through historic times, and sources of accurate information are not easy to find. Between fabricated AI summaries and the corrupt mainstream press, it’s easy to get fooled. I have to admit I get most of my political information from YouTube. If you are careful about what you watch, you can be sure it is the truth.

Sofia is the real thing. Sign up for a paid subscription with me if you think what I’m doing is valuable.

Share

Leave a comment

39 Comments

  • Avatar Don says:

    In his personal life Marx was an execrable human being.

  • Avatar Mare Holden says:

    Thanks for passing this on. I like it alot, wish the young would find enough humility to listen to and open their eyes. Sounds like Sofia might be worth looking into. Thanks for the connection.

  • Avatar erin says:

    You can criticize Marx to death, and rightly, but it won’t make any difference.

    The real issue the kids are responding to is that the capitalism of this era is on the fritz. The conservatives concentrate on defending something that no longer works the way it was supposed to. It’s become mafia capitalism. Crony capitalism.

    Unless there is another option, they’ll reach for the option offered by the loony utopians. Cuz it sounds good and hey, “it’s never been tried properly!”

  • Avatar Tirion says:

    Wasn’t Marx paid by Nathan Rothschild to write “The Communist Manifesto”? Aren’t Marxism, fascism and NAZIsm all divide-and-conquer tools of the Rothschilds?

    Of all people, Marx was definitely not a Marxist!

    https://thedukereport.substack.com/p/how-the-british-invented-communism

    https://thedukereport.substack.com/p/the-milner-fabian-conspiracy-explainer-f57

  • Avatar Roger says:

    Are you saying that but for one bad parent, we might have been spared Communism?

    Is that supposed to inspire us to be better parents, or to not be parents?

    On the EscapeKey substack s/he lays out how managerial control (i.e. technocratic socialism) is gradually replacing governance. If you control the money you control the society. So it doesnt really matter if the DSA gets a few more or less seats in the govt-for-show that is our Congress. The process continues with people like Soros and his Open Society to cheer it along and put the human cogs into place in govt & industry.

  • Avatar (u0648u062Du06CCu062Fu0627u0644u0644u0647 )wahidullah Noorzai says:

    What makes this piece interesting is that it raises a legitimate question, but then risks answering a complex intellectual question with a personal biography.

    Marxu2019s financial dependence, his debts, and Engelsu2019 support are certainly relevant to understanding the man behind the theory. Hypocrisy and personal inconsistency can tell us something about an intellectual figure. But they do not, by themselves, prove or disprove the validity of an economic or political theory.

    A stronger test is to examine the ideas themselves: What did Marx correctly identify about capitalism? Where was he wrong? Which predictions failed? Which concepts remain useful for understanding inequality, labor, class, and political power? And where did Marxist systems produce outcomes fundamentally different from what their advocates promised?

    There is also an important strategic lesson here. Ideas should be judged by evidence and consequences, not by the saintlinessu2014or the failuresu2014of their founders.

    That standard should apply equally to Marx, capitalism, socialism, nationalism, liberalism, conservatism, and every other political doctrine. If we dismiss an idea because its founder was personally flawed, we risk replacing analysis with character assassination. If we accept an idea because its founder was admirable, we make the opposite mistake.

    The most useful question is therefore not whether Marx was a u201Cfreeloader.u201D It is whether his diagnosis of society was accurate, where it was mistaken, and what history ultimately did with the ideas he helped create.

    That is a much harder questionu2014but also a much more intellectually honest one.

    u2014 Wahidullah Noorzai

    Former Senior ANP/ANCOP Officer | Strategic & Security Analyst

    • Avatar Russell A. Paielli says:

      Are you aware that communist governments murdered over 100,000,000 of their own civilian subjects over the past century? You show no sign that you are.

      • Avatar (u0648u062Du06CCu062Fu0627u0644u0644u0647 )wahidullah Noorzai says:

        Yes, I am aware of the enormous human toll associated with communist regimes, including mass executions, political repression, forced labor, and catastrophic famines. Those victims deserve to be remembered and studied honestly.

        But acknowledging those crimes is different from assuming that every death attributed to every communist government can be reduced to one precise number or automatically attributed to Marx himself.

        My point is not to defend communism. It is to apply the same historical standard to every ideology: examine the ideas, examine how governments implemented them, examine the evidence, and never excuse mass suffering because it was committed in the name of a political doctrine we happen to favor.

        The victims should come before the ideology.

        • Avatar Russell A. Paielli says:

          OK, but that does not preclude discussing Marx’s character flaws as this article does.

          • Avatar (u0648u062Du06CCu062Fu0627u0644u0644u0647 )wahidullah Noorzai says:

            Absolutely. Understanding an ideology also requires examining the character, choices, and contradictions of the people who shaped it. Ideas should be studied seriously, but their authors should not be placed beyond criticism.

      • Avatar LiMaxiB says:

        Remember the iconic ad of a frying pan and somebody cracking an egg on the sizzling frying pan and the voiceover saying u201Cthis is your brainu201D and then he cracks the egg and says u201Cthis is your brain on drugsu201D. Each of the communist societies that have existed have failed miserably. Unfortunately, the option of uncontrolled capitalism that is worse than communism. Capitalism and communism meet in the same spot. Itu2019s where they go from there thatu2019s the difference.

        what is frightening is that weu2019re giving a platform to the socialist party in the United States were one did not exist in the past. I understand our leaders have failed us, but Iu2019m afraid that the brainless public just might elect more of the socialists in a country with a constitution like ours. Itu2019s ours to lose!

        • Avatar Wahidullah Noorzai | NIDA says:

          I understand the concern you are raising, especially about what happens when an ideology becomes stronger than the institutions designed to contain and correct its consequences.

          But my experience in Afghanistan taught me to look at these questions from a slightly different angle.

          The decisive issue is not always whether a society calls itself capitalist, socialist, democratic, or something else. The deeper question is whether its institutions can absorb pressure, correct mistakes, adapt to changing conditions, and preserve meaningful choices before the situation becomes irreversible.

          In the field, I learned that systems rarely fail because of one decision alone. They become vulnerable when assumptions harden, alternatives disappear, warning signs are ignored, and institutions lose the ability to reassess the situation.

          That is why I see both uncontrolled capitalism and rigid state control as potential problems when they reduce institutional accountability and narrow the space for correction. The labels may be different, but the strategic danger can become similar: concentration of power, weakened feedback, and fewer alternatives.

          For me, the real strength of a constitutional system is therefore not simply the economic model it follows. It is its ability to preserve freedom of action u2014 the capacity to correct itself without having to collapse first.

          Afghanistan taught me that once a system loses its alternatives, even a powerful system can become strategically fragile.

          The question, then, is not only what ideology we choose.

          It is whether the system we build can continue to adapt when reality changes.

          u2014 Wahidullah Noorzai

          Former Senior ANCOP/ANP Officer | Field-Based Strategic & Security Analyst

          • Avatar LiMaxiB says:

            Very well said, but basically what I said. Man is the variable we canu2019t fully control.

          • Avatar Wahidullah Noorzai | NIDA says:

            Absolutely. That is precisely why judgment and adaptability matter so muchu2014the plan may be ours, but human behavior can always change the situation.

  • Avatar Isabella says:

    This is the best history lesson about Marx Iu2019ve ever read and makes more sense around the way he supposedly lived in poverty and squalor (by choice?).

  • Avatar (u0648u062Du06CCu062Fu0627u0644u0644u0647 )wahidullah Noorzai says:

    The crimes committed by communist regimes should not be minimized, and the millions of people killed under Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and others deserve to be remembered.

    But historical analysis requires more than attaching every crime of a regime directly to the writings of one thinker. We should distinguish between Marxu2019s theoretical ideas, the political systems later built in his name, and the decisions of particular regimes and leaders.

    If we are serious about history, the standard should be consistent: examine ideas by their arguments, and governments by their institutions, policies and consequences. That allows us to condemn mass political violence without turning history into a slogan.

  • Avatar Dave Bross says:

    Marx was controlled opposition working for the banker/merchant class.

    Here’s a long read detailing that in excruciating detail:

    https://mileswmathis.com/marx.pdf

    Some speculate the Russian revolution was engineered by agents of the wealthy because they feared the size and power of Russia.

    And some quotes:

    Remember kids, when the communist people take power, they always become a capitalist government. All of Soviet Russias production and means of production was seized by the government rationed out in starvation amounts to it’s people, and the CCP take 90% of their peoples wealth and leave them in squalor. As soon as the people become the government, communism fails. On the alternative, as soon as capitalist leaders take hold in the government, the corporations become regulatory bodies and stack the system against the poor, and capitalism becomes a corporatocracy, and fails.

    It’s almost as if the problem isn’t a matter of communism, socialism, or capitalism, which are all excellent human behaviors, but is actually the gross centralization of authority, and enforcement of specific behaviors as economic ideologies that we idolize as if they were some kind of broken, artificial gods.

    Samuel Streeter

  • Avatar George says:

    Charles Darwin, a free mason English contemporary of Marx wrote his origin of the species. This kicked off the ever changing theory of evolution. Many today are adherents of the philosophy not knowing a thing about genetics or amino acids and proteins.

    Proteins could never evolve, it is a scientific and statistical impossibility. It is much easier and scientific to believe in a creator .

    People prefer self deception rather than having to answer for their lives and choices.

    • Avatar aprayerformonkey says:

      Thank you. I was just stating to type the same thing.

      8 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

      19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

      20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

      21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

      22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

      23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

  • Avatar Wise Old Woman in the Woods says:

    When Marx was writing, London would have been a hellscape. That catchy chimney sweep song from Mary Poppins had as its basis a young boy climbing into chimneys breathing in deadly soot. Girls and boys were put into coal mines to work. I read that slave owners defended themselves, saying at least they weren’t industrialists. While Marx was noting real issues, he was seemingly a gasbag that would have faded away. Such fate was escaped by Darwin’s theory of Evolution and the Eugenics theory developed by Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton, who, except for this idea, was a brilliant polymath. Put all three together, and you get a bloody triangle with the Brahmin types continuing to meddle in our lives. I am reading Arthur Koestler’s Darkness at Noon about an aging imprisoned revolutionary awaiting his turn at the forced confessional. It reads like a trolling of the modern Left so much that I have to remind myself that the author was a former true believer who published it in 1940. Darwin’s theory really was used to raise class consciousness. In 2019, Peter Robinson of the Hoover Institute interviewed David Berlinski, Stephen Meyer, and David Gelernter on the topic of Mathematical Challenges To Darwin’s Theory Of Evolution. Three very different academics conclude that it is just pseudoscience. Yet, academics keep thinking that with the right evolutionary move, they will push us to utopia. But this begs the question, why do the masses fall for it? You can throw as many pine cones as you want in a desert, and they won’t seed. This is the question. Why is it so willingly embraced? The Khmer Rouge murdered 25% of their population – one in four. That is an astonishing number. Mao didn’t do the killings. Others willingly did it.

    • Avatar Antoinette Kunda says:

      i keep asking that ‘why’ question over and over….

      • Avatar Wise Old Woman in the Woods says:

        I came across the work of Rene Girard and scapegoating. There seems to be something in human DNA where we conduct massive killings – usually at the behest of elites.

        • Avatar Antoinette Kunda says:

          hmmm I will check that out…. So why do we (general populace) hold some others above ourselves (i.e. elites) when we all know they are the same as us (blood, bones, need oxygen, etc.) and those same elites need what we offer weird dichotomy imo …. its like a human who has a look that others have a reaction to (your really pretty, or smart or ??) and suddenly that person is guiding their life…. i don’t know it is just something that has rolled around in my head almost my whole life… Thanks for your input/guidance

          • Avatar Wise Old Woman in the Woods says:

            Somehow, during the lockdowns, I came across this paper. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299572373_Ritual_human_sacrifice_promoted_and_sustained_the_evolution_of_stratified_societies I have no idea how it popped up for me. I might have been researching Eugenics. That topic popped after researching what happened to Jacobson v. Mass. decision (smallpox vax case cited by our current Supreme Court) in later decisions. It turned out to be a whopper. The 1905 decision was used in Buck v. Bell (1927) to justify state power to sterilize those unfit to reproduce. Hitler didn’t invent the system. The UK did, and flung it to the US, which cannonballed it to Germany in the 1920s, funded by Rockefeller. Hitler just took it to an even uglier level – it was already happening as they were killing off the unfit to live. The paper I linked is a study on the emergence of ritual killings with hierarchies. Stratified societies emerge when language becomes more sophisticated. The Piranha tribes are apparently the only people who do not have a complex language to describe future and past events and also do not have hierarchies. Tom Wolfe did a really fun book on the people, which is an easy read. People may say they want egalitarianism, but they really don’t. Smart, inventive people invent useful things – like bathrooms and toilet paper.

  • Avatar Letitia Pepper says:

    Great article! For more on Marx, including his plan to infiltrate all institutions, starting with the Catholic Church, I highly recommend a book published in 2020, “The Devil and Karl Marx,” by Paul Kengor. (I ordered it during the COVID plandemic.)

    Kengor went to Europe to look at documents contemporary with Marx’s life, and found letters addressed to Marx as “My Dear Satan.” He also found reports by people who had seen Marx act as though he’d been possessed, presumably by the Devil.

    Perhaps that sort of beginning of Marxism explains why socialist societies have always “ended up in tears” and millions of horrible deaths. If you want first-hand accounts from some of the survivors, check out your local small doughnut stores. At least in California, many of them are owned by Cambodia families, some of whose family members survived the Kymer Rouge’s reign of socialist terror and can tell you what it was like.

  • Avatar On an island says:

    Insightful commentary. Thanks!

  • Avatar aprayerformonkey says:

    Amen.

  • Avatar Antoinette Kunda says:

    Thanks for this! I have seen other versions of it. At first I was shocked. I kept finding other pieces of supporting evidence…. It is truly amazing how he (and his supporters) got this going as big as they did all based on ‘oh poor me’ crap…

  • Avatar Daniel says:

    I don’t believe any of this nonsense. There is always two sides to the story.

  • Avatar Lilia Joy says:

    This article focuses entirely on attacking one man instead of the actual issues democratic socialists are fighting for today, while conflating the modern ideology with a human who lived a long time ago. Marx is the white man whose work was popularized in the western world- I see nothing here that makes valid points against indigenous perspectives that differ from capitalism, or against modern western ideologies that have made significant advances since Marxu2019s time. I also donu2019t see any acknowledgment of the immense wealth inequality that exists in our world and nation that not only harms our economy but costs many their lives despite lifetimes of hard work- especially if they become chronically ill or disabled, like myself. Without Medicaid I would have died – thatu2019s a socialist program. What I see is one privileged white man dunking on another at the cost of countless people whose stories heu2019ll never know or stop to consider. Health communities and societies look out for each other. When people are well and have the social support they need, we are intrinsically motivated to work, to build, to create, to do things that benefit ourselves and others. People did all of this before capitalism and will do so again when this system shows itself to be unsustainable. Hopefully the planet and significant parts of the population wonu2019t die due to the greed and destruction of the ultra wealthy before that time comes. Thereu2019s a reason the wealthiest are building bunkers and a reason why so many people are outraged that insurance CEOs profit exorbitantly at the expense of so many individuals who are denied coverage for life-saving medical care. Weu2019re living in a time of extreme ideological divide and until we learn that solidarity is the only way to survival and the way to build the most rewarding and beautiful society, we will continue to crumble at the most immediate cost of the working class and our youth.

    • Avatar LiMaxiB says:

      Both ideologies have merit. Religion has merit. But here comes the secret ingredient in the soup: human greed! Once humankind gets involved the outcomes are based on power, greed and survival. Just like the animal kingdom! Just saying

Leave a Reply