This is an interesting analysis of “right-wing” conspiracy theories from a Marxist perspective. I think this guy is correct in the sense of criticizing conspiracists for their narrow focus on individual personalities, unsubstantiated myths, and exaggerated roles for particular institutions and ideological factions they especially detest rather than trying to develop a System-wide institutional, structural, cultural, and ideological analysis. That said, this guy’s own analysis once again demonstrates the weakness of the economic determinism of the Left as well as the irreconcilability of anti-capitalism and cultural hyper-liberalism.
Case in point: He actually tries to argue that capitalism opposes open borders which flies completely in the face of the historic practice of capitalism. The growth of commercial economies has always had the effect of breaking down traditional institutions and boundaries. All of the major mouthpieces for capitalist interests support the relaxing of border controls (see the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, New York Times, et. al.) Whether one favors open or closed borders is beside the point. Clearly, the bulk of capitalist opinion and interest is on the side of open borders, which makes sense considering the interest of capitalism in growing and maintaining the global economy.
Also, as Pareto pointed out, while class conflict certainly exists, it is hardly the only or even most significant form of conflict. Conflicts between civilizations are far more important than class conflicts within individual civilizations. Conflicts between states and national entities are more significant in terms of their impact on the world and on history than conflicts between class interests within a state. Arguably, even conflicts between elites and counter-elites within a particular society, or even conflict between rival factions among the institutionalized elites, are just as or more important than class conflict.
The Left’s emphasis on race/class/gender analysis is a dramatic illustration of the weakness of the Left’s general outlook. If the race/class/gender determinism of the Left were accurate and factual, then one would have to argue that ethnic conflict between German-Americans and Anglo-Americans within the US during WWI was just as historically significant as the war itself, which pitted the Old World against the New World, and traditional aristocratic Europe against Jacobinism, or that post WW2 cultural liberation movements in the West were just as significant as the Cold War or the Sino-Soviet split. But this is what the Left actually believes, which is why, among other things, textbooks put out by leftist publishers treat American history in such a way that, for example, a speech by Elizabeth Cady Stanton is considered more significant to American history than a speech by George Washington or Thomas Jefferson, and the founding of the Sierra Club or the Stonewall Rebellion is considered on par with the invention of the airplane or the moon landing.
