Obviously Karl Marx is regarded as one of the earliest philosophers and idealists regarding the Communist manifesto. However what if he never invented it? The POD for this is that Marx is disillusioned with political thinking after the Prussian government grows opposed to his involvement in the Heliganist movement which is then combined with him being forced to emigrate from Prussia and then France due to this, however he then doesn't move to Belgium but instead heads for America with his counterpart Fredrich Engels not following him as in OTL. Assuming Engels doesn't give up his ideals what would the ideology that we call Communism today look like without Marx's input in Das Kapital? Would it still be as Popular with eastern revolutionaries like Lenin and the Bolsheviks?
WI Marx never invented Communism?
- Thread starter CanveyFanNumberOne
- Start date
Also would the US be as opposed to it during the early stages of the 1900s when business had control of the economy?
I can’t say I’m personally familiar enough with leftist theory to answer this question, but there’s a timeline that seems to answer this question to some extent. It has the Paris Commune succeed, which removes one of the main inspirations for Marx’s writings and instead allows other ideas like Blanquism and anarchism to have a greater impact. Leftist theory is much less formalized, and seemingly crucial class-related concepts like the “bougeoisie” are never codified to the same extent. If I recall correctly, Engels comes up with something more along the lines of Christian Socialism which is eventually adopted by revolutionaries in Russia (although the amount of historical changes by then ensures that it looks nothing like the revolution of OTL). Definitely worth the read IMO.
Marxism primarily influenced bourgeois intelligentsia.
As did anarchism.
The militant working people’s movements independently developed revolutionary libertarian maximalisms on multiple occasions. (KAPD, UK ship stewards, Petelov plant, Hot Autumn, Builders Labourers, etc etc etc). It arises out of class conflict, not didactic critiques of bourgeois economic ideology
Marx would be pleased: Marx and Marxism were irrelevant to the working class’ project of self liberations.
So the main effect is on which 19th century intellectuals a certain kind of progressive 20th century theological intelligentsia ape. Probably Engels. If not then Veblen.
As did anarchism.
The militant working people’s movements independently developed revolutionary libertarian maximalisms on multiple occasions. (KAPD, UK ship stewards, Petelov plant, Hot Autumn, Builders Labourers, etc etc etc). It arises out of class conflict, not didactic critiques of bourgeois economic ideology
Marx would be pleased: Marx and Marxism were irrelevant to the working class’ project of self liberations.
So the main effect is on which 19th century intellectuals a certain kind of progressive 20th century theological intelligentsia ape. Probably Engels. If not then Veblen.
Do more work on actual movements of workers. KAPD has fairly wide publication for such a movement. There’s also plenty of self loathing intellectuals. You’ve probably read Orwell. Read Wigan Pier.
So, sans Marxs works, there are so many possibilities, but more than 99% of them would lead to a very similar picture today. Why? You can kill a man, but you can’t kill an idea. All Marx did was observe, test theories, and publish his work- like a scientist would do. The first worker movements weren’t Marxist- but the failures of them lead to the evolution of politics towards Marxian ideas. Like a political evolution. Heck, even the first marxists differed greatly from today’s- most of them were colonialist and favored reform over revolution when it counted. The social movement, proletarian-ism (to give it a history-less name) took from the intellectuals justification for what it was going to do anyways. So- why Marx (or rather, Lenin’s interpretation of Marx?) because it was scientific, not utopian, and it promised liberation to the right people (workers, peasants, and colonial subjects) not all marxians agreed that the peasants could be revolutionary- they didn’t achieve any revolutions. Lots of anarchists said we don’t need authoritarianism- they never succeeded. It’s not what I or others like- it’s just what works. There may not be one name to credit the ideas of ATL communism, but unless all the would be Lenins of the ATL miss their chance due to pure chance, then you will still see a communism emerge. And if not on OTLs schedule, I would predict it would happen a little later anyway. But, that is just my respectful opinion 
It's worth repeating: Karl Marx did not invent communism. To say so is to downplay the contributions of figures like the Diggers, Gracchus Babeuf, Robert Owen, Charles Fourier, Joseph Déjacque, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon as has been mentioned, and the First International in general besides Marx and Engels. Non-Marxist communism is just as worthy of being called communism as Marxist communism.
Regardless, what if Marx had never existed? Well, you'd be depriving the First International of its greatest economist, and Engels may not have written a text that addressed the contradictions of capitalism as adequately as Capital ITTL. The First International still forms and splits, but its figureheads for the split are likely Engels and Bakunin, both of whom will, as IOTL, have more perspectives in common than not.
Otherwise, I dunno. So many butterflies flapping with a POD like that.
Regardless, what if Marx had never existed? Well, you'd be depriving the First International of its greatest economist, and Engels may not have written a text that addressed the contradictions of capitalism as adequately as Capital ITTL. The First International still forms and splits, but its figureheads for the split are likely Engels and Bakunin, both of whom will, as IOTL, have more perspectives in common than not.
Otherwise, I dunno. So many butterflies flapping with a POD like that.