Why Jonathan Chait Is Wrong About Marxism, Liberalism and Free Speech
http://inthesetimes.com/article/19007/jonathan-chait-marxism-liberalism-free-speech-jacobinTake, for example, individual rights like rights to free expression. The Marxist argument isn’t that free expression is a bad thing; the argument is that liberals have an anemic, purely formal understanding of free speech rights that ignores the fact that, in practice, the ability to make one’s voice heard in public debates is extremely unequally distributed.
After all, on paper Donald Trump and I both have the same formal, liberal right to free speech. But in practice, Trump’s immense wealth grants him orders of magnitude greater ability to express his views in public.
For the classical liberal, the wealthy media mogul who owns newspapers and TV stations has the same free speech rights as the janitor who cleans his office. For Marxists, this absurdity reveals a fatal flaw at the core of liberal politics: it’s not possible to realize ideals of democratic self-rule, freedom and equality within a system based on radical class inequality.
To their credit, modern American liberals have since moved on from the earlier, classical liberal denial that capitalism is built on class inequality—modern liberals in the United States, for instance, embrace some elements of the welfare state and view the labor movement in a generally positive light whereas this would have been anathema to earlier liberal forebearers. But this shift to the left must be seen for what it really is: an attempt to shore up an uninspiring and limited political project by co-opting programmatic demands from the socialist movement, including Marxism.
= new reply since forum marked as read
I especially liked this paragraph:
"What’s more, since our own society falls radically short of the democratic ideals of freedom and equality, it would be absurd to say that acts of disruption or civil disobedience aimed at realizing those ideals are wrong. Indeed, the rationale for disrupting Trump’s rally in Chicago wasn’t to prevent him from saying merely offensive or disagreeable things. It was about standing up to social forces that have the publicly stated aim of marginalizing and scapegoating some of the most vulnerable members of our society. It was for the sake of democratic values, not in spite of them, that tens of thousands of people turned out to shut down Trump in Chicago."
It ties in a lot about what I've been thinking lately about the Trumpeter. The guy is an opportunist, but he's an opportunist playing with societal forces that are extremely dangerous and, as yet, unorganized. These forces, once the hubris of the bourgeoisie unleashes them to solve some sort of problem for the ruling class, are very hard to put back in the box once they're loosened. Think Pandora. 
It's also social forces that are not hesitant to use the streets as their primary battlefield, not just the ballot box. They must be confronted in a solid united front against them because that's where they will be. Trump is only playing with these forces to increase the name-recognition of his "brand", but the next leader might be more ideologically motivated and so, MUCH more dangerous.
