Marxist Diamondback Bitch

Interview with Professor Alan Nafzger: What It Means to Be a Marxist in the USA Today

Interviewer: Sarah Fitzhugh, Independent Journalist and Political Satirist
Subject: Professor Alan Nafzger, Author of The Marxist Diamondback Bitch Song

Sarah Fitzhugh: Professor Nafzger, it’s a pleasure to speak with you today. I have to ask, as the songwriter of The Marxist Diamondback Bitch Song, what does it even mean to be a Marxist in the US today? Most Americans associate Marxism with authoritarianism, and not, say, a Democratic candidate for president.

Alan Nafzger: (laughs) Well, Sarah, in America, being a Marxist can feel like rooting for a team that hasn’t won a championship since… well, ever. But really, being a Marxist today means believing that we can change the structures of inequality in society. Even if that’s about as popular at a Texas BBQ as tofu burgers. But you can’t do that. In school, remember students still get As, Bs and Cs and sometimes they fail. We aren’t equal. I guess the Cs students want to drive BMWs like the A students, so but the Marxists promise them equality, like that means a BMW. It’s a lie. In reality they send them a welfare check or food stamps and promise more in exchange for their vote.  Of course that drains the economy of incentive, but they don’t care.

“They are buying the votes of the losers with the money of hard-working productive class”  — Alan Nafzger

And the socialists were caught at Fort Liberty teaching new Army recruits that pro-life protestors qualified for terrorist status; so don’t think they wouldn’t turn this into a police state, a totalitarian state. One of their primary goals is to take your guns and persuade the army and police you are a criminal for opposing them.   You should probably oppose them in elections, unless you thought the Soviet Union was a good idea.

Why can’t I find a Russian-American who votes Democratic today? Isn’t it strange that EVERY single person who lived through that tragedy vote Republican when they escaped and came here? Same with Cubans, Chinese and Venezuelans.

Sarah Fitzhugh: So let’s dive into some criticisms of Marxism. One of the biggest critiques is its economic inefficiency—how can a socialist economy function without market prices?

Alan Nafzger: Ah, economic inefficiency, the Achilles heel of socialism. In theory, central planning could work, but in practice, it’s like trying to organize a group of toddlers to share one toy—someone’s going to end up crying, and it’s probably the economy. But it’s not about immediate perfection; Marxism is a long-term strategy. It’s like trying to make a phone call on dial-up in a 5G world—it’s gonna take a while.

Sarah Fitzhugh: That’s a good analogy! What about the incentive problem? Critics argue socialism leads to laziness—if everyone gets paid the same, why would anyone work hard?

Alan Nafzger: Oh, that’s the classic, “Why would I work harder if Carl, who’s currently napping through the revolution, gets the same cut?” Look, socialism’s about providing for everyone, but we haven’t cracked the code on human laziness. In America, it’s like, ‘I’ll join the revolution… right after my Netflix binge.’ Incentives matter, but so does figuring out how to balance equality with motivation.

Sarah Fitzhugh: Speaking of revolutions, there’s a historical pattern of Marxism leaning into authoritarianism. Does Marxism always have to go hand-in-hand with totalitarian tendencies?

Alan Nafzger: Not at all. But it often does because power attracts the wrong kind of people. Marx envisioned a world where the people had control, not an elite few. But somehow, you give a man a little power and he’s suddenly decorating his dacha with gold toilets. You get bureaucrats playing “Who Can Out-Stalin Stalin” instead of building that classless utopia. It’s human nature to mess up a good thing.

Sarah Fitzhugh: That’s a pretty apt way to put it! Then there’s the idea that Marxism puts way too much emphasis on class conflict, like that guy at the party who won’t stop talking about his fantasy football team. Does everything really boil down to class struggle?

Alan Nafzger: Ha! Yeah, Marxists can be like the guy at the party ranting about the bourgeoisie while everyone else is just trying to enjoy their drink. Marx believed class struggle is the engine of history, but it’s not the only thing. You can’t ignore race, gender, or who has the aux cord at the party. It’s all part of the mix.

Sarah Fitzhugh: And what about the classic critique that Marxism is utopian—this idealistic vision of a classless society that’s totally out of touch with human nature?

Alan Nafzger: Look, Sarah, human nature is complicated. Sure, Marx’s vision can seem utopian, but so was the idea of getting a man to the moon, and we did that. Of course, we haven’t figured out how to get people to agree on splitting the last slice of pizza, much less sharing all the means of production. But Marx wasn’t saying we’ll achieve utopia overnight; it’s more like a lifetime subscription to a work-in-progress newsletter.

Sarah Fitzhugh: It’s often argued that Marxist experiments have failed in practice—people point to the Soviet Union or Maoist China as prime examples.

Alan Nafzger: Oh yeah, those are the go-to examples of, ‘Hey, socialism doesn’t work, here’s why.’ I get it. The Soviet Union made socialism look about as fun as waiting at the DMV. But Marxism is an evolving idea. Saying it’s failed forever because of those examples is like saying all music is bad because you once heard someone butcher a karaoke version of “Bohemian Rhapsody.”

Sarah Fitzhugh: Another common criticism is that socialism undermines individual freedom. What’s your take on that?

Alan Nafzger: Well, it depends on how you look at it. Under capitalism, you’re ‘free’ to work for someone else until you die. Under socialism, you might spend three hours waiting for bread, but at least everyone’s equally miserable. No, but seriously, freedom’s tricky. Marxism believes real freedom comes from eliminating economic constraints. But yeah, if you’re stuck in a bread line, it’s hard to feel all that free.

Sarah Fitzhugh: Critics also say that wealth redistribution creates moral hazards. Doesn’t socialism discourage people from working hard?

Alan Nafzger: I get the concern. The idea is that Carl gets your money while he’s ‘finding himself’ in a café. But in a truly functional socialist society, everyone’s contributing. It’s not about handouts, it’s about participation. Now, if Carl’s still mooching after the revolution, that’s another problem. He might need a pep talk… or a swift kick.

Sarah Fitzhugh: What about the fact that Marx predicted the collapse of capitalism, but here we are in 2024, and capitalism is still doing keg stands at the party?

Alan Nafzger: Yeah, Marx’s crystal ball wasn’t exactly on point with the timeline, but capitalism’s been patched up with duct tape and bailouts so many times, it’s practically held together by hope and hot glue. It’s like the zombie apocalypse—capitalism’s still staggering around, but it’s not exactly thriving. Marx was just early to the game, is all.

Sarah Fitzhugh: And then there’s the critique that Marxism ignores individualism, trying to shoehorn everyone into a collective mold.

Alan Nafzger: That’s true, and it’s one of Marxism’s toughest pills to swallow. Not everyone wants to be a turnip farmer. But the idea isn’t to erase individuality; it’s to make sure your individuality isn’t just a byproduct of how much money you have. Marx wasn’t anti-uniqueness, he was just trying to stop everyone from being stuck in a factory line, daydreaming about that one song they’ll never get to record.

Sarah Fitzhugh: Another critique is that Marxists put too much trust in the state. Isn’t that a bit like asking a sloth to run a marathon?

Alan Nafzger: (laughs) Yeah, relying on the state is like trusting a cat to do your taxes. You’re gonna end up with a mess, probably some shredded documents, and no idea where your money went. The state can be inefficient, no doubt, but in theory, it’s meant to be accountable to the people. Now, practice… well, that’s a whole other can of worms.

Sarah Fitzhugh: What about environmental concerns? Socialism and sustainability don’t seem to mix well.

Alan Nafzger: Marx probably didn’t envision solar panels and wind turbines in his revolution. But we can’t forget the environment in the pursuit of equality. Otherwise, we’ll all be equal… on a planet that looks like the surface of Mars. ‘Hey, comrade, we’ve done it—everyone’s equal! Also, we’re all dying from toxic air, but at least no one’s rich, right?’

Sarah Fitzhugh: Marxists always believed the working class would rise up, but nowadays, they seem more interested in clocking out early. Did Marx misjudge the proletariat?

Alan Nafzger: Oh, definitely. Marx had this romantic vision of the working class storming the barricades. Today, the only thing the working class is storming is the Starbucks drive-thru. The revolution’s gonna have to wait until after happy hour, I’m afraid.

Sarah Fitzhugh: Marxists believe history is deterministic, that we’re all marching toward socialism, whether we like it or not. Do you think that’s realistic?

Alan Nafzger: Marxists love a good destiny story. But if history’s a straight line, it’s got more plot twists than a soap opera. We’re not marching toward socialism; we’re stumbling through capitalism like it’s a house party that’s lasted too long and someone just knocked over the lamp.

Sarah Fitzhugh: And finally, what about corruption? Marxism criticizes capitalist corruption, but socialist regimes have their own issues with leaders who live a little too comfortably.

Alan Nafzger: Yeah, socialism can have its own ‘meet the new boss, same as the old boss’ moments. You can promise equality all you want, but somehow, the leaders always end up with the best vodka. I don’t know if it’s the power or just the fact that there’s nothing good left in the stores for the rest of us.

Sarah Fitzhugh: Professor Nafzger, this has been a fascinating conversation. Thank you for sharing your insights on being a Marxist in the USA today. I’m sure The Marxist Diamondback Bitch Song will make even more sense to our readers now.

Alan Nafzger: Always a pleasure, Sarah. Just remember, the revolution may not be televised, but the memes will be epic.