What he probably meant was that he is a Marxist in terms of historical analysis. A Marxist Historian, by definition, analyzes everything in view of economics as the driving factor for everything. Now, that ideology seeps into other things, but, that is likely what he meant.
Sounds Plausible. I’m not sure if he claims to be a history buff. He’s a blubbering hack. But he’s not dumb enough to proclaim himself a Marxist on the air.
Thanks for that information...so early in the thread!