MARXISM IS DEAD, LONG LIVE MARXISM!
German philosopher Wolfgang Fritz Haug’s statement echoes another old saying: “The king is dead, long live the king!” This traditional proclamation, which can be traced back to 15th-century France, was made when the old king died and the new king took over. It means that while the monarch has passed away, the monarchy itself continues seamlessly without a break.
With the defeat of the left front in Kerala, for the first time in 50 years there is no communist government in India. Incidentally, it was Kerala in 1957 that witnessed the first communist government in the country coming to power through democratic elections. However, in the last few decades most left governments have lost power due to inefficient economic policies and corruption, and the Maoist movement and insurgency have been curbed through coordinated policies of regional development and security operations. This has been interpreted by some as a terminal decline of the left in India. But the truth is more nuanced.
END OF IDEOLOGY/HISTORY DEBATES
It is not the first time that end of ideology and history has been proclaimed. In 1960, American sociologist Daniel Bell wrote The End of Ideology. He maintained that in advanced western capitalist societies, the classical conflict between labour and capital was waning. Radical scholar C. Wright Mills and Marxist scholars countered by arguing that the “end of ideology” was itself a clever, hidden ideology promoting western welfare capitalism as the pinnacle of human achievement, ignoring deep-seated social inequalities.
The end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union prompted Francis Fukuyama to declare the “End of History”. He argued that mankind had reached the endpoint of its ideological evolution, with western liberal democracy and free-market capitalism emerging victorious. The proposition invited criticism for being too Eurocentric and presuming that economic growth would automatically lead to western-style democracy. His belief that the ‘end of history’ societies would have technical and economic problem-solving competence to resolve challenges has been proven wrong. The experience in the last few decades proves that they are prone to extreme populism, political polarisation and democratic backsliding, driven by wealth inequality and cultural anxieties, and are not immune to regression or systemic crises.
It also ignores the rise of religious fundamentalism, anti-globalisation protests and growing hyper-polarisation, demonstrating that ideological fervour was far from dead. And then geopolitical scholar Samuel P. Huntington proposed “Clash of Civilisations”, arguing that future conflicts would be driven by cultural and religious identities rather than ideological or economic divisions, thereby proving that history as contestation of ideas is far from dead.
THE COMPLEX SOVIET LEGACY
The Soviet experiment and its legacy are particularly complex. The state propelled an agrarian society into an advanced industrial, urban and scientific superpower, ensured universal literacy, good quality public education and health care, gender equality in the workforce and completely reshaped eastern Europe and Eurasia. One can argue that had there been a countervailing force (i.e. Soviet Union), the Gaza and Iran wars might not have taken place. However, this was achieved through brutal state coercion, forced collectivisation, purges, gulag, denial of civil rights and catastrophic famines. It left unresolved ethnic and territorial disputes. Its negative consequences are still felt across the region, from Nagorno-Karabakh to Ukraine. The guiding motto of “democratic centralism” effectively led to a rigid, highly stratified bureaucracy (the nomenklatura) that suppressed political and personal freedoms and created a one-party totalitarian system. As Michael Burawoy argued, “The failure of communism proves that there can be no future after capitalism. Communism is only a nightmarish detour: the longest road from capitalism to capitalism.” But that is not borne out by subsequent developments.
MANY SHADES OF RED
After the failure of each Marxist/communist/socialist government we are told that Marxism is dead. But soon we witness a new communist/socialist experiment in another part of the world, or its rebirth in the same milieu/society after a gap. What declines and dies is just one model, some would say an imperfect one, while the ideology remains relevant and takes new incarnations. A century ago English philosopher C.E.M. Joad in his Introduction to Modern Political Theory declared: “Socialism is like a hat that has lost its shape because everyone wears it.” He only highlighted that there is no single concrete definition of socialism, and it has evolved into varied models in different time and space to serve separate agendas.
In Europe, socialism took many forms, not always in agreement with the radical economic theories of Karl Marx, which advocate the proletariat overthrowing the capitalist system to achieve social ownership of property. Democratic socialism in the UK and Europe advocates a socialist economy achieved and managed through democratic political systems. The Nordic model, prevalent in Denmark, Sweden and Norway, combines a free-market capitalist economy with a robust, state-funded welfare system—universal health care, free education and generous social safety nets, resulting in a high standard of living. Christian Democracy in Germany, France and Belgium is rooted in Christian democratic values. It advocates a “social market economy” where the state plays a regulatory role but relies on private enterprise and collective bargaining. Welfare benefits are tied to an individual’s employment and contribution rather than universal citizenship. The Mediterranean model of Italy, Spain and Greece relies on family networks and state-provided pensions. But it suffers from higher regional inequalities compared to the Nordic model. Eastern and Central European models are based on the legacy of 20th-century Soviet-style planned socialism. The post-communist countries (such as Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic) have transitioned into market economies but maintain varying degrees of public services. They try to adapt the liberal or continental models, combined with local national policies. But there is a “Third Way”: a modernised, centrist approach of the late 20th century that fuses social democratic values with neoliberal economic policies.
SOCIALISM IS LIKE PHOENIX
Thus the global left remains alive and kicking in 2026, though its focus has shifted. It concentrates on combating economic inequality, addressing climate change and protecting labour rights within capitalist frameworks. In the United States, the Democratic Party proposes progressive economic policies, including wealth redistribution and universal health care. In Latin America, under the “pink tide”, Brazil and Chile have elected left-of-centre governments promising social equality and environmental protection. In Europe, as discussed above, the centre-left social democrats remain influential, often leading coalitions. However, there is stiff opposition from both the hard right and the radical left. In India, while traditional far-left and Maoist movements have seen a steep decline, centrist and even right-wing political parties have taken to populism and welfarism.
In conclusion, one compares socialism with the phoenix, the mythical immortal bird which is reborn from its own ashes. The cyclical history of socialism is best captured in the lyrical words of sociologist Zygmunt Bauman: “reborn from every pile of ashes left... by burnt-out human dreams and charred hopes”. Time and again, despite setbacks, socialist and collective economic movements re-emerge to challenge capitalist inequality.
John Kenneth Galbraith, Canadian-American economist, diplomat, public official and intellectual, was US ambassador to India in the early 1960s and also travelled to the USSR. He argued that the Soviet collapse discredited only the authoritarian, centrally planned model of socialism, not the core socialist ideals. He asserted that in an increasingly complex and unequal capitalist world, socialism remains relevant as a moral compass to protect the underprivileged, the environment and correct market failures.
The author is professor at the Centre for Russian and Central Asian Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
