Eleven Theses on the Ideology of the Mexican Left

1

Every appeal to orthodoxy takes the form of a call to a return to some lost origin, which is associated with “authentic” belief. When this kind of appeal is made in the context of a belief-system that has at its core the rejection of all myths of origin and of the notion of “authentic belief,” the results are bound to be paradoxical. As such, the only way to be an orthodox Marxist is not to be an orthodox Marxist. To keep Marxism from becoming itself an ideology, the followers of Marx must follow him in method rather than in content, and remain forever critical. They must take him not as a prophet but as a Zen master: after the ladder has been climbed, one must drop the ladder and kill the master.

2

In the same way that the attempt to redeem Christianity from the atrocities of the Catholic church by declaring that the Borgia Pope was “not a real Christian” stinks of sentimentality, the desire to redeem Marxism from the crimes of Stalin and Mao is not only a-historical, but also profoundly ideological. Marx was concerned with real men and women, as they appear in their activity. It then seems dishonest to excuse Marxism from the weight of the real world and judge it as if it was a product of pure reason, floating pristine in the ethereal regions of Platonic ideas. Factual, historical Marxism is what Marxists do and have done.

3

It is almost unbelievable that the followers of the most historicists of thinkers feel as though they can ignore history. The world has changed radically since 1848, and as the Chinese people learnt in the most bitter of ways, China is not Germany. The attempts at interpreting realities different from those of XIXth century Europe using Marxist categories were disastrous precisely because they failed to see this very basic fact —and they remained disastrous because such interpretations solidified as the ideology of the new ruling class. The question “Is Marxism ideological?” has a historical answer.

4

Whenever the left becomes dogmatic, it becomes an enemy for all progressive causes. Is it not a paradox that “real-communism” vanished all critical voices to Siberia? When every line of thought but the party line is rejected, when the yelled epithet “revisionist” or the inexplicable insult “neo-liberal” is considered the strongest of arguments and the most penetrative of analysis, the left begins to resemble the right —to the point that its relationship to reactionary forces becomes that which certain positivists think philosophy has to science: ancilla —the little helper.

5

This is extremely pernicious because liberation has not been achieved; on the contrary, the structures of oppression are more insidious than ever. Yet it is foolish and ill fated to attempt to attack the demons of post-industrial capitalism in a post-colonial world with the weapons of the industrial revolution. What is more, if all the energies of progressive politics are spent in a dogmatic refusal to acknowledge the real world, the real world is unlikely to change.

6

This should not be taken to mean that we must abandon Marx. On the contrary: we must bring him back to life —his specter has haunted us long enough. The followers of Marx must remember that they are revolutionaries: all that is solid must turn into thin air; no new ideology must be allowed to solidify. If this means finally letting Lenin rot in his grave, so be it.

7

Yet it is important to keep in mind that Marxism is not the ultimate, final theory. It is not the end of philosophy, but its redefinition: philosophy will no longer be the disciplined search for eternal, ultimate truths, but an attitude of constant suspicion, of permanent circumspection. We should take from Marx a new conception of the task of thought: not the establishing of theories, but a never-ending practice of criticism.

8

This circumspective attitude, this particular kind of attention to one’s surroundings is essential for change to take place. If the followers of Marx do not pay close attention to the world around them, the strait gate may slip by them. The philosophers of the future must have a keen pair of eyes, so that they may see the moment when everything is at stake and then act with decision.

9

The followers of Marx must also shed that beautiful illusion that the messiah will one day inevitably come. The XXth century has shown us that the messiah always arrives too late, and only when he is no longer needed. The followers of Marx must act, even if it is in small ways, in insignificant ways. Waiting for the revolution is the best way to guarantee that the revolution will never come.

10

That Communist Parties around the world are an endangered species bears witness to all of this: Marxism has been unsuccessful, to the point that it resembles a dying animal that cannot feed itself. Communism, like love, must be reinvented.

11

If the followers of Marx truly desire to change the world, they must reinterpret it constantly —lest they begin to resemble their enemies.We must create a new Marx every day and kill him every night.

Sinceramente,

NMMP