Paul Kengor's The Devil and Karl Marx: Communism's Long March of Death, Deception, and Infiltration is a stupid and ignorant book.
Kengor is particularly keen to chronicle atheist attacks from Marx and communists on religion.
Juvenile Literary Works from Marx
Kengor starts with a poem that Marx wrote when he was 19. Marx envisions himself, I guess,
as a ferocious violin player, inspired by the devil. Apparently, Marx was a fan of Goethe.
Kengor never uses the phrase 'sturm und drang'.
He goes on about some other poems and a play of Marx's. Kengor thinks that Marxists unjustly ignore
these early works. They are in the first volume, though, of the Marx-Engels Collected Works.
Some Bits and Pieces from the Lives of Marx and Engels
The second section, after this prelude, is about Marx and Engels. It
has little to say about Marx's ideas. He calls Marxism utopian, seeking a heaven on earth.
He says nothing about distinction between scientific and utopian socialism.
Kengor, in this part of the book has a lot to say about Marx's life. When discussing
his movement among countries, he does not even mention that nations kept on kicking him out.
Kengor hops around in chronology. He is big on Marx not earning a living while studying
and agitating. Also, Marx had poor bathing habits.
He brings up Bruno Bauer several times.
But he does not mention that The Holy Family mocks Bauer.
When bringing up Mikhail Bakunin, Kengor does mention the later falling
out of Bakunin and Marx. Does Marx's intolerance in splits in the First
International have something to do with Lenin's behavior? With Stalin?
Inasmuch as Kengor even discusses Marx's work, he stops at 1848, with the Communist Manifesto.
The quotation about religion as the "opiate of the people" is from Marx's Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right,
from 1944. Marx's argument is for changing material conditions so that religion will no longer
be needed as "the sigh of the oppressed creature". This idea is not inconsistent with
arguments for atheism. Such idealist, superstructural arguments are beside the point, though.
The context of this well-known phrase from Marx is over Kengor's head.
Here is all Kengor has to say about Capital:
"Marx had wasted over two decades writing Das Kapital, a long, ridiculous tome,
a waste of money as well as time. He had initially received a three hundred dollar advance for
the book, but extended over twenty-three years of drawn-out writing, it equated to a little over
a dozen dollars a year.
The Bolshevik War on Religion
Kengor does not connect the ideas of Marx to Lenin and events in the Soviet Union.
At a more personal level,
I do not know that Marx was responsible for what happened to his children after his
death, including the suicides of two daughters.
I had not known Lenin spoke at Paul Lafarge's funeral.
Kengor brings up Bukharin several times,
but does not mention that he was a victim of Stalin's show trials.
I do not think Engels not getting married to the women that he slept with is on the same
moral plane as the tortures in communist prisons in eastern and central Europe.
Excerpts from the House Un-American Activities Committee
I do not know why I should care about testimony in the 1940s and 1950s to the House Unamerican
Activities Committee. I was under the impression that a united front and a popular front are
different concepts. The former is all non-facist forces, while the latter is all leftist forces.
Anyways, Kengor does not discuss this distinction or even why it is a proplem for the
Communist Party to work with Christians, and specifically Catholics, for specific reasons.
Yes, the Communist Party was atheist. Kengor barely mentions the relationship of Catholics
to Franco, and only in the context of what communists say. He only mentions Hitler in
the context of turns in the communist party line with the Hitler-Stalin pact and then the German
invasion of the Soviet Union. He has nothing to say about how this has anything to do
with Marx's ideas. And he doesn't really discuss communist sectarian activities in taking
over front groups. I am not surprised that communists were sometimes deceitful.
Various Intellectuals
The fifth part consists of two chapters. Kengor writes a bit about the life of the occulist Aleister Crowley,
the New York Times's reporter Walter Duranty (who believed what the Soviets told him in the 1930s),
the gay activist Harry Hay, Wilhelm Reich, Walter Benjamin, and Kate Millett. Why this selection?
Perhaps because snippets of their lives are suitable for ad hominem. Kengor is fairly candid that Crowley
does not have much to do with Marxism or communism, for example.
We have another time Kengor says he does not know what he is talking about:
"Trying to discern the inane and impentrable ideas of the men of the Frankfurt School
is a soul-crushing exercise in futility. One must spend years scouring pages
and footnotes of thick volumes (mostly in untranslated German) trying to arrive
at a vague flickering of understanding at what in the devil's name these madmen
were thinking about. It would be bad enough if this venture was simple a waste
of one's time - especially given the sacrifice of more edifying reading - but
what is worse is the strain and toxicity to the intellect and the soul. One
is struck again and again at how some Godless intellectuals (especially German ones)
can descend into such rank intellectual vacuity, ambiguity, and downright stupidity..."
If I thought Kengor was a person of good-will, I might emphasize here.
Conclusion
The single chapter in the conclusion section neither summarizes the book nor
follows from what comes before. We get complaints about Obama's totalitarianism,
gay marriage, the Frankfurt school, critical theory, Gramsci, relativism, and cultural Marxism.
We also get echos of Fulton Sheen and Pope Pius X's 1907 encyclical on modernism.
Apparently, Kengor has never heard of post-modernism.
Kengor does not even know what he has covered in the book:
"In this book, we have looked at key figures of the Frankfurt School, including
Georg Lukacs, Walter Benjamin, The Sexual Revolution's Wilhelm Reich, and
(among others) Herbert Marcuse..."
No, he has not discussed Lukacs or Marcuse, even to the extent of saying something
about some moments in their lives.
Some Overall Comments
The book has lots of redundancy. Kengor distinguishes between socialism and communism.
I do not see why the book should go through the same quotations
from the same papal encyclicals again to see that the Catholic Church opposed both communism and
socialism.
The references are odd. For example, if I see a discussion of Darkness at Noon,
I expect a reference to Koestler's novel, not a book by a historian.
I would hope for more than extracts from Wikipedia and from the "About" section
from certain web sites.
It fails at the level of the individual sentence. Consider, "Sheen noted that
whereas Karl Marx called religion 'the sigh of the oppressed creature,
Sheen saw communism as the sigh of the oppressed creature."
Is Sheen noting how Sheen saw communism? At one point, Kengor has Manning
Johnson testifying to the HUAC that "this was 'the extension of the hand
of friendship and cooperation to the church, while in the other hand holding a dagger
to drive through the heart of the church.'" But then, "the outstretched hand concealed
a knife." Which metaphor do you want?