g
Well, yes, but really no. Marx never called himself a Marxist. Marx called himself a communist. Most Marxists called themselves communist. Most communists called themselves Marxists. The very much evil people killing other people in the Soviet gulags, Cambodian killing fields and the Chinese Great Leap Forward very much so considered themselves Marxists. Why would anyone want to associate themselves with that?
Among historians such as
Klas-Göran Karlsson,
R. J. Rummel,
Stéphane Courtois,
Benjamin Valentino,
Steven Rosefielde,
Matthew White or
Stephen Kotkin, the main disagreement isn't whether Marxism is Communism or vice versa, but about whether we are talking about 60.000.000 people killed or 160.000.000 under the ideal of creating a better utopia under the red banner.
Yes, of course. If we were to assume that we can read the mind of neo nazis and neo commies, we can clearly see that one party and of course not the other is clearly and obviously lying. As I have stated before, then in general, many observations say more about the observer than the observed.
Again, well yes, but actually really no: a number of eminent historians argue that Marxism in its original 1850-form deliberately advocates genocide.
Take for instance
Andrzej Walicki who said this about an article by
Engels in
Marx's
journal that "It is difficult to deny that this was an outright call for genocide" - and please let me cite the exact words of said article: "The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of
entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward."
Of course, I totally get the idea that if you define Nazism as genocide and Communism as salvation, then obviously the two have no connection.
But, for a statement like "It's impossible to look at the world from a Nazi framework without in your heart of hearts wanting to commit genocide, but Marxist historical analysis, for instance, is a reasonably widely used framework used even by people who don't want to institute the dictatorship of the proletariat or whatnot" to be true, then you would have to define Nazism as "wanting to commit genocide", and "Marxism" as "a reasonably widely used framework used even by people who don't want to institute the dictatorship of the proletariat". Sorry to say, but there is much historical evidence to support either statement.
You want to call yourself a Marxist, a Communist, a Nazi or a Fascist or whatever? Then please accept that you will be associated with other people who called themselves that. If you don't want to associate yourself with mass murder, then maybe consider a different label #justsaying