"The living Karl Marx was a dismal failure. He passed most of his life in poverty, dependent on the charity of the capitalist Friedrich Engels. His writings were never sufficiently in demand to earn a living. He had great difficulty in finishing anything, and the bulk of what he wrote he never saw in print. His revolutionary activities Ôcame to nothing, and capitalist Europe was more tranquil and stable when he left the scene than when he came on it. The radical organizations with which he was associated broke up in a few years, or he broke them up in disgust. He quarreled violently with virtually all the leaders of the socialist and revolutionary movements of his day. The working class of England, where he lived in exile, paid him little heed and soon forgot him. Engels prepared a flattering eulogy for his burial, but only nine persons were there to hear it. The dead Marx has come into unexampled success. Marxism is the basis of official ideologies governing about a third of the worldÕs population, and millions of people in non-Marxist countries voluntarily subscribe to political parties and to an ideology supported by Marxist (or Marxist-Leninist) states. Marxism-Leninism is the only worldwide political movement, with Communist parties in all countries where not suppressed by force.
Even more remarkable than this political success has been MarxismÕs appeal to other millions who accept no party discipline, who are under no compulsion, and who do not stand to gain materially by accepting a Marxist outlook. A large part of the worldÕs intelligentsia and university students, especially outside the English-speaking countries, look on Karl Marx as a towering authority, a supergenius. Indeed, in recent years, the stature and importance of non-Communist Marxism have grown, especially in Europe. . .. This enormous gap between contemporary and latter-day appraisal badly needs explanation."
*Robert G. Wesson, Why Marxism? The Continuing Success ofa Failed Theory (New York Basic Books, 1976), pp. 3-4.
