being a bit contrary — is it fair to call Marx in that lot. At the end he was a philosopher and a lot of what we consider communism isn’t pure communism (which is probably best described in the Kibbutz system in Israel) — yes, Marx’s followers were undoubtedly evil, but on reading Das Kapital, it came across as an economic treatise, with flaws, but not a madman’s work like Mein Kampf.
snip: being a bit contrary — is it fair to call Marx in that lot.
Spirited: Marx’s madness was revealed in his poems wherein he spoke of destroying the world and its’ human population. He forthrightly declared that God the Father is “our enemy.”
Marx was a materialist monist, which means in practical terms that in his “philosophical” system mankind no longer existed as individuals but as aggregates of matter fully dispursed throughout nature. It is only in this light that Marx’s crackpot economics, ie., the forbidding of private property can be understood. For if there are no individuals it follows that there can be no such thing as individual “private” property.
The connections between Marxism and Nazism are many. Among them: Theosophy, Gnosticism, monism (collectivism. oneness, solidarity, etc), seething hatred of God the Father and His created order, evolutionary conceptions, and man as god.
So yes, Marx belongs “in that lot.”