Star-Spangled Branding
Star-Spangled Branding
Independence Day bulletin on MAGA Communism
Happy Independence Day to all those Radio Free Pizza fanatics living in the USA! (Or to everyone else, my sincere apologies for the policies of the U.S. ruling class, though U.S. citizens deserve an apology from them too.) The eve of America’s birthday seems like the perfect time to reflect on the past, present, and future of our nation’s political landscape. Just as our May Day bulletin explored MAGA Communism to honor the triumphs of the labor movement, today’s edition of our irregular Wednesday bulletins explores the ongoing reception of MAGA Communism and its treatment in mainstream and independent media to honor the premier national holiday of the country it seeks to make great. So, let’s dive into the latest developments and the continuing saga of this intriguing and contentious ideological trend.
At the start of last month, Big Mad Crab and Snow Himbo of the Indie News Network took on the topic. After first discussing The Guardian’s negative treatment of the online ideology promoted by Jackson Hinkle and Haz al-Din of Infrared, which aims to unite supporters of Donald Trump’s MAGA movement with Marxists and communists, they analyze this ideology’s contradiction and estimate its feasibility.
Though the pair express surprise at the mainstream media’s attention to this fringe movement, Himbo nonetheless notes (at ~1:08), “Look at the numbers anywhere: this shit is gaining traction.” But with that said, they naturally question how Trump supporters, who are largely capitalists, can be united with communists—especially when Trump himself has expressed anti-communist sentiments—and accordingly question the viability of MAGA Communism.
Crab and Himbo go on to present (at ~15:03) Dr. Richard Wolff’s analysis of MAGA Communism, in which he explains how political movements have historically co-opted terms like socialism and communism for their own purposes—even when their ideologies are fundamentally opposed to those concepts—before citing examples of how political movements have co-opted terms like socialism for their own purposes, such as Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazi Party). Wolff emphasizes that the MAGA movement is inherently hostile to the principles of socialism and communism, and finds the term “MAGA Communism” to be merely a clever marketing ploy to attract attention. (Though I think Wolff would do well to note Walter Masterson’s encounter with a MAGA supporter who expressed his affinity for Wolff’s beloved employee-owned enterprises.)
The hosts air (at ~38:11) Jackson Hinkle’s defense of MAGA Communism in his interview with Craig “Pasta” Jardula (sourced from a 2022 episode of The Jimmy Dore Show), in which he argues that it is starting important conversations and uniting people across ideological lines—though, of course, Crab and Himbo note how others criticize the label as divisive and suggest focusing on uniting the working class without specific labels or ideological associations. Accordingly, the pair proposes (at ~50:05) alternative approaches to uniting the working class, such as focusing on common economic struggles and material concerns rather than specific ideological labels, and suggest that a movement centered on workers’ rights and improving living standards could resonate across the political spectrum.
Indeed, as Himbo observed above, MAGA Communism is getting traction—or getting attention, anyway, with Raw Story covering it on the same day as The Guardian did above. Radio Free Pizza devotees will recall our May Day bulletin covering the investigation of Jerry’s Take on China into the ideology as an Australian living in China. Among those featured was the estimable commentator Caleb Maupin, whom the titular Jerry Grey interviewed again in May.
His second time around, Maupin delves (at ~10:16) into (among other things) the role of the Communist Party USA during the Great Depression and its efforts in organizing the unemployed and leading mass movements demanding economic relief, leading to concessions from the Roosevelt administration like the Works Progress Administration and the Wagner Act. Emphasizing a pragmatic focus on economic development and anti-imperialism, Maupin outlines (at ~1:12:32) a four-point plan for transitioning the U.S. towards a socialist economy, including mass hiring of the unemployed, public control of natural resources, debt cancellation and the creation of a national bank—I suppose something like we discussed in our May dispatch on “Libertarian Communism”—and an economic bill of rights.
On the whole, Maupin seems to greatly appreciate the opportunity to discuss a socialism with American characteristics without talking about MAGA Communism. Still, there hasn’t been a shortage of people interested in talking to him about it: Doug Lain of Sublation Media interviewed Caleb Maupin and Peter Coffin two weeks ago, in part to discuss the same ideological subculture.
I’m sure both Maupin and Coffin appreciate that their conversation covers quite a bit more than MAGA Communism—including, importantly, the historical influence of intelligence agencies and other state actors on shaping leftist ideologies and movements—and that it lasts an hour before it finally turns (at ~1:00:25–1:14:59) to the subject. Here, Maupin argues (at ~1:11:25) that the disaffected working-class supporters of the MAGA movement could be a fertile ground for recruiting to a genuine socialist movement:
I have not denounced MAGA Communism because I believe […] that the kind of people in the United States who are angry at the government, who are angry at the big corporations, who don’t trust the FBI, who oppose the wars, and are from impoverished areas, Appalachia and the South, and are from impoverished backgrounds […] turning to Trumpism, to QAnon, to these anti-establishment ideas, because they're mad at the government: that is who communists should be recruiting right now. If there's ever going to be a socialist revolution in the United States, those people are going to be the beginning of it. And if people don’t come to terms with that and recognize that, they are deluding themselves […] Trump is becoming the symbol of anti-establishment sentiments by people whose living standards are going down, people who are at odds with the imperial state, people at odds with the big corporations, etc. And it’s the very, very, very primitive beginnings of class consciousness. And those are the people we need to be talking to […] I have found it’s harder, but it’s far more productive to go and talk to people that are against the state and against the system who are drifting toward MAGA than it is to try and talk to somebody who nominally thinks socialism is a good idea, but, you know, has bought the establishment line on every issue, hook-line-and-sinker, and [who] wants to defend the establishment from evil Trump’s insurgency, you know what I’m saying?
From here, their conversation turns the importance of building a mass movement and the challenges of promoting Marxist ideas in the current political climate. Notably, though MAGA Communism represents an attempt to bridge the obvious gap between left- and right-wing populist movements, the trio take time to discuss the communication failures of progressive activists and the challenges in communist organizing among the same: of those people mentioned by Maupin who are nominally interested in socialism but who effectively support the U.S. establishment, Coffin observes (at ~1:23:02) that such progressives regard their political ideology as if “it’s a brand to, it’s a unique selling point. It’s a means to separate yourself as a different thing, to sell yourself in certain ways, but also to feel special in certain ways.”
That, of course, diminishes the potential for a socialist revolution in the U.S., as progressive activists so often behave in a manner matching the caricature of Marxist ideas in American society. Accordingly the rest of the trio’s discussion emphasizes the importance of building a mass movement rooted in working-class communities and organizations, rather than relying solely on intellectual discourse or online platforms. Their conversation concludes with a fruitful dialogue on the potential for cooperation between American, Chinese, and Russian workers, and on the importance of avoiding ideological traps that could lead to conflict between these groups.
Of course, readers with excellent memories may recall that we’ve featured Coffin’s critique of MAGA Communism before. (Though it may surprise you to learn that his “What Is Inflation?” from Monday inspired this very bulletin: his argument that the libertarians’ beloved gold-backed currency serves as sound money because of the labor required to mine it—and therefore demonstrates the labor theory of value—is one I wish I had included in my May dispatch attempting to synthesize a socialism with American characteristics.) As you might expect from an apparently more open critic—or, maybe, just from criticism more optimized for algorithms—Coffin seems to entertain fewer invitations to explain the curious ideology, and more of them to critique it, such as his appearance on 1Dime Radio just last week.
Obviously MAGA Communism is the main topic. At the start, Coffin offers (at ~0:15) another nuance of his critique (apparently clipped from their conversation’s second hour available to 1Dime’s Patreon subscribers), observing of MAGA Communists that “the primary thing that they care about is cultural arguments. They don't mobilize over Marxist stuff, they mobilize over cultural issues. That’s what animates them, that's what they care about”—not, in other words, counteracting the immiseration of the American working class.
As we’ve heard him argue before, Coffin describes here (at ~9:53–12:50) how he finds this approach counterproductive for creating a niche audience by combining two polarizing brands that alienate most people:
But in terms of MAGA communism, my, my feelings on it are I understand the impulse: I get the idea of attempting to reach out to people that the left doesn’t normally, you know, view as worthwhile to reach out to […] I have conservative family members. I've lived in a lot of conservative areas and I'm a communist […] I get that impulse. I like that impulse even […] But […] These things are brands. MAGA and communism are brands in the public sphere. And with MAGA and communism, it’s essentially creating a tiny segment of people who are both comfortable with MAGA and comfortable with communism […] There’s so few MAGA people who don’t think, like, “Communism is here to kill us.” Like, “Joe Biden’s a communist and that’s why communism is bad” […] to make such a small, hostile and contrarian niche […] it doesn’t do what they’re advertising it to do: it is not an effective means to reach out to conservatives and attempt to tell them about class struggle […] They know that it’s them versus the boss. They just don’t look at it in the way that I might look at it.
So, points for recognizing the gap to bridge, and maybe for creativity, but nonetheless, MAGA Communism doesn’t seem fit for purpose. Coffin concludes by saying (at ~12:51–13:27), “I find it to be a contrarian brand and I don’t think it is a productive thing. I don't think it’s fascism. I don't see those people as fascists: I see them as fandom communists who don’t like the left aesthetic […] It’s contrarianism. It’s people who are doing lifestyle stuff […] It’s cosplay in a lot of ways, but it’s very contrarian cosplay.”
Interestingly, their discussion shifts (at ~16:17) to the concept of “wokeness,” which the speakers view as an ideology that redirects legitimate concerns about representation and inequality towards progressive aesthetics and justifications for segregation and essentialism. Both agree that wokeness often perpetuates the same issues it claims to address—such as racial segregation on college campuses under the guise of creating “safe spaces”—while also observing how certain individuals or groups claim to represent entire communities, leading to promoting of fringe or extreme views as the norm.
(What a weird AI-generated image to result from that prompt! Though it does seem to suggest something about segregation—since many believe [falsely?] that slaves built the Egyptian pyramids, and that the U.S. imposed racial segregation on the descendants of slaves—and about fringe beliefs becoming the norm: anyway, fringe beliefs would sure explain that scene.)
Their conversation also touches (at ~43:00) on the representation and advocacy of LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly transgender people. They express concerns about the promotion of extreme or irresponsible views within the LGBTQ+ community— such as advocating for the abolition of parental consent for gender transitions in minors—and argue that while supporting LGBTQ+ rights is important, some fringe elements within the community may alienate the general public and undermine the broader movement, though they find these issues difficult to navigate while avoiding transphobia or bigotry.
The pair also discuss (at ~1:03:09) anarchism and localism, arguing that such arrangements often lead to conflicts and hierarchies between different groups, citing historical examples of indigenous communities that were egalitarian internally but engaged in warfare with other groups. Accordingly, they suggest that these schools of thought ignore the realities of human nature and the need for centralized planning and coordination.
Overall, I find their discussion on these topics notable for its treatment of the cultural issues around which they have observed MAGA Communists mobilizing alongside conservatives. In addition, the pair seem to find themselves at odds with differing perspectives from leftist discourse for what we might call “cultural issues” of a different kind, perhaps related to fundamentals of human nature or realistic potential. All together, their analysis highlights the complexities of modern American culture and of the fault-lines in its contemporary political divisions.
So! What’s the takeaway?
As Crab and Himbo suggest, perhaps Hinkle and Al-Din should consider dropping the “MAGA” label and instead focus on uniting the working class across political lines without invoking specific ideological associations. That would surely mean emphasizing common economic struggles and material concerns rather than divisive ideological labels: would mean, in other words, developing a plan for building a mass movement (presumably around policies like those Maupin outlines to Grey above) rooted in working-class organizations and communities, with a focus on practical organizing and addressing the immediate needs of workers.
Toward that aim, it would be wise to develop alternative strategies for effectively communicating Marxist ideas to disaffected working-class communities in a way that resonates with their lived experiences and material concerns, but without suffering the disadvantages of affiliating oneself with a conservative political movement under constant contention. Of course, that would likely mean engaging in further discussions and outreach to understand the perspectives of different political groups and find common ground on issues affecting the working class, which surely includes the MAGA movement. After all, if you’re promoting a platform of workers’ rights, improved living standards, and addressing the shared challenges faced by the working class, it can’t hurt to have a big tent.
But with that in mind, I think it’s worth recalling from Lain’s conversation with Maupin and Coffin that U.S. intelligence agencies have historically conducted clandestine operations to undermine socialist movements domestically and internationally. I suppose it’s a tall order—developing strategies for countering the activities of intelligence agencies while promoting genuine working-class solidarity—but surely the success of any revolutionary platform depends on its broad appeal, and accordingly, those intelligence agencies must not have any opportunity to introduce divisive elements of ideology, such as the segregation and essentialism that Coffin observes resulting from wokeness—or, for that matter, like the inflammatory bombast of the MAGA movement itself.
That’s all I’ve got: happy Independence Day!
is very interesting, how so many americans are discussing the incoming future... Which at least points to a possibility of change. Bravo Radio Free Pizza! Community Matters