Marxism’s Influence in American Culture and Policy

Karl Marx published The Communist Manifesto in 1848, outlining ten ideological “planks” designed to dismantle traditional society and replace it with a fully centralized, state‑controlled system. While Marx wrote for 19th‑century Europe, I would suggest that these same principles have quietly taken root in modern America through decades of legislation, cultural shifts, and expanding federal authority.

This article examines each plank, its original meaning, and how critics believe it manifests in the United States today — not as a declaration of fact, but as a warning from those who see a troubling ideological drift.

America has been increasingly adopting more of Marx’s ideals, sometimes more subtle than other times, yet sometimes rather openly.  Whether it’s political change or social change like in cultural Marxism, we have witnessed the long march through our institutions to embrace Marxism.

Many critics argue that Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal marked America’s first major turn toward Marxist‑style governance, using federal expansion, economic centralization, and sweeping social programs to push the nation toward collectivist principles on a scale never seen before.

Many critics argue that President Obama openly aligned himself with Marxist‑leaning figures and ideas, pointing to the ideological makeup of several advisers and associates during his political rise. His connection to socialist movements goes back at least to 1996, when the Chicago chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) endorsed his campaign for the Illinois state senate — a detail documented by journalist Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media. Years later, during Obama’s presidential run, the Communist Party USA publicly expressed support for his candidacy, further fueling claims that his political coalition included outspoken Marxist sympathizers. To these observers, Obama’s endorsements, associations, and ideological allies reflect a broader pattern of socialist influence within modern American politics.

In recent years, several prominent figures in American politics have openly aligned themselves with democratic socialist ideas, signaling a broader ideological shift that critics argue reflects Marxist influence in modern policy debates.

In 2006, Barack Obama publicly endorsed Senator Bernie Sanders, who openly identifies as a democratic socialist. Sanders’ later loss to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Democratic primaries has been the subject of ongoing speculation among some commentators, who argue that irregularities and party favoritism may have influenced the outcome. Regardless of those debates, a growing segment of the American public has increasingly embraced Marxist and socialist ideas, reflecting a broader ideological shift in the nation’s political landscape.

New York City mayor, Zohran Mamdani, has described himself as a democratic socialist and stated in his inaugural address that he was elected as one and would govern as one, underscoring how explicitly socialist identity has moved into mainstream municipal leadership. Likewise, U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio‑Cortez has become one of the most visible national voices associated with the democratic socialist movement; while she has received support from the Democratic Socialists of America, that alone does not confirm formal membership, her policy positions and public rhetoric have nonetheless made her a central figure in the resurgence of socialist‑leaning politics.

These developments illustrate how Marxist and socialist frameworks have migrated from fringe activism into the halls of American governance.

Many observers argue that the Black Lives Matter movement reflects themes consistent with the 10 Planks of Communism, a pattern they also see in related activist groups such as Antifa and Refuse Fascism. In a 2015 interview on The Real News Network, BLM co‑founder Patrisse Cullors openly stated that she and Alicia Garza are “trained Marxists,” a comment that later resurfaced widely in national media and highlighted the ideological framework guiding their organizing philosophy.

From the perspective of critics such as former Communist Party member Manning Johnson, movements like BLM are not primarily about racism or police brutality, but represent a modern expression of Marxist strategy—using racial tension as a divide and conquer tactic to destabilize American institutions and advance revolutionary goals. These concerns are further amplified by reports that BLM’s fiscal sponsorship and funding channels have included organizations such as Thousand Currents and the George Soros funded Tides Foundation, which some analysts associate with broader left‑wing political networks.

An Axios/Harris Poll online survey found that 37% of Americans would prefer to live in a socialist country. In a Fox News survey of registered voters, 25% had a favorable view of socialism. A new Zogby Analytics online poll found a similar result: 29% of likely voters had a positive view.

The Communist Manifesto

Following are the original ten planks within the Communist Manifesto written by Karl Marx in 1848, followed by a discussion of how America has adopted each of the planks. The authors later wrote that some measures had become outdated and that their practical application depended on historical conditions.

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose.

Marx believed private property was the root of inequality and must be eliminated.

The courts have interpreted the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868) to give the government far more “eminent domain” power than was originally intended. Under the rubric of “eminent domain” and various zoning regulations, land use regulations by the Bureau of Land Management property taxes, and “environmental” excuses, private property rights have become very diluted.  As a result, private property in lands, vehicles, and other forms are seized almost every day in this country under the “forfeiture” provisions of the RICO statutes and the so-called War on Drugs.

Then, there’s the unconstitutional red flag laws states are passing that empowers authorities to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens.

Private owners of property are required to get permission from government relative to the use of their property. Those who do hold property are required to pay taxes on that property in order to keep it.

Under the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), administered through a branch of the USDA, your animals are effectively reclassified as part of “the national herd,” not private property. Once the government can compel you to register your farm and every animal on it, ownership becomes meaningless — control determines ownership, and they hold the control. In practice, you are simply inventorying livestock on behalf of the true owner: the federal government.

From this perspective, property is no longer absolute — it is conditional, regulated, and revocable. Non-payment of taxes results in fines, imprisonment, and confiscation of the property.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

The U.S. income tax system is explicitly progressive.

Many critics argue that the 16th Amendment (1913), the Social Security Act of 1936, Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933, and the spread of state‑level income taxes collectively marked a major ideological turning point in America — a shift they view as a quiet but decisive Marxist advance into U.S. economic and political structures. Some scholars even contend that the 16th Amendment itself was never properly ratified, underscoring their belief that these policies represent a long‑standing and deliberate erosion of constitutional limits on federal power.

IRS enforcement power

These progressive taxes have replaced tithing for many and continue to drain the lifeblood out of the American economy and greatly reduce the accumulation of desperately needed capital for future growth, business starts, job creation, and salary increases. The income tax requires of us that we serve two masters in violation of Matt. 6:24; requires of us that we rob God in violation of Mal. 3:8; requires of us that commit idolatry in violation of Ex. 20:3; requires of us to use unjust weights and measures in violation of Lev. 19:35-36; and requires us to sign contracts with foreign and alien gods in violation of Ex. 23:32-33.

Progressive taxation mirrors Marx’s call for wealth redistribution through state power.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

Marx sought to eliminate generational wealth.

Another Marxist attack on private property rights is in the form of:

• Estate taxes
• Inheritance taxes
• Capital‑gains taxes on inherited assets

These policies weaken family autonomy, have abolished or at least greatly diluted the right of private property owners to determine the disposition and distribution of their estates upon their death, and strengthen state control over wealth transfer.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

Marx advocated seizing property from political dissidents.

We call it government civil asset seizures, tax liens, “forfeiture” Public “law” 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; and the IRS confiscation of property without due process. Surveillance and financial de‑platforming by the U.S. government manifested in the confiscation of property of patriots who speak out or write against the “government” (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill).

The concern: punishment through economic control.

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

Marx wanted a single national bank controlling all credit.

The Federal Reserve System, created by the Federal Reserve Act of Congress in 1913, is indeed such a “national bank” and it politically manipulates interest rates and holds a monopoly on legal counterfeiting in the United States. Most U.S. banks participate in the Federal Reserve System and are regulated at the federal level, including through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), responsible for deposit insurance and oversight of financial institutions. The Federal Reserve Banks issue Fiat Paper Money and practice economically destructive fractional reserve banking. This is exactly what Marx had in mind and completely fulfills this plank.

This shift transformed a decentralized banking system into one directed from Washington.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State.

Marx called for state control of movement and messaging.

• In the United States, all electronic mass‑media communication is overseen and regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the powerful federal agency created under the Communications Act of 1934 to centralize government control over broadcasting and telecommunications.
• Transportation is controlled and regulated by the Department of Transportation and the Interstate Commerce Commission (established by Congress in 1887), and the Federal Aviation Administration as well as Executive orders 11490, 10999 — not to mention various state bureaucracies and regulations including State mandated driver’s licenses.
• TSA authority
• Federal Highway Act of 1916 made federal funds available to States for highway construction), the Interstate Highway System, 1944 (funding began 1956); Interstate Commerce Commission given authority by Congress to regulate trucking and carriers on inland waterways, 1935-40. There is also the federal postal monopoly, AMTRAK and CONRAIL — outright socialist (government-owned) enterprises. Instead of free-market private enterprise in these important industries, these fields in America are semi-cartels through the governments regulatory-industrial complex.

Transportation and communication are now federally managed systems.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

While the U.S. does not operate Soviet‑style factories, critics argue federal influence appears through:

• Public‑works programs
• Government‑contracted industries
• Federal subsidies shaping production (energy, agriculture, defense)

We call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture. As well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations. The Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1933 provided that farmers will receive government aid if and only if they relinquish control of farming activities.

The concern is not ownership but control.

8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

Marx envisioned universal labor obligations.

We call it Social Security, a social welfare scheme that takes the place of strict liability (Ex. 21:28-36) and individual responsibility and violates the 10th Commandment by appealing to our lust and greed. Some may call this income redistribution, but the Bible calls it covetousness and theft in violation of Ex. 20:15-17. This and other social programs have enslaved us and future generations with a National debt that can never be repaid and inflation caused by the Federal Reserve has caused the need for a two “income” family.

Critics argue that federal labor policy has long been used to advance centralized, collectivist control over the American workforce. They point to the Department of Labor’s regulatory power — seen in minimum‑wage mandates and in the United States’ economic entanglement with nations like Communist China — as evidence of a system that increasingly prioritizes state authority over individual enterprise.

They also highlight a series of 20th‑century legislative milestones that expanded federal influence over employment and social structure: the rise of women in the workforce during the 1920s, the 19th Amendment, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the growth of union power, affirmative‑action directives, federal public‑works programs, and Executive Order 11000, which outlines government authority over labor mobilization during national emergencies.

Finally, critics note that the Equal Rights Amendment — if ever fully ratified — would legally require equal treatment in all areas of employment, including military service, making women subject to the draft under the same terms as men. To these observers, the cumulative effect of these policies reflects a long‑term ideological shift toward centralized federal control consistent with Marxist organizational principles.

These policies reflect collectivist labor management.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.

Marx wanted agriculture and industry merged under state direction.

We call it Agenda 21, the Planning Reorganization Act of 1949 , zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Super Corporate Farms, as well as Executive orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public “law” 89-136. Food processing companies, with the co-operation of the Farmers Home Administration foreclosures, are buying up farms and creating “conglomerates.”

• USDA regulatory power
• NAIS livestock tracking
• EPA agricultural oversight
• Federal food‑supply management

The fear: farmers becoming inventory managers for the state.

10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

Marx viewed state‑run education as essential for shaping ideology.

• Public schools have become ideological battlegrounds. The purpose is to train the young to work for the communal debt system. From Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton to Elizabeth Warren, Communist influenced lawmakers are increasingly calling for free education for all. Our children are being indoctrinated and inculcated with the government propaganda, like “majority rules”, and “pay your fair share”. Where in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or even the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26) does the phrase “fair share” appear? It doesn’t. Nowhere in America’s founding documents or tax law is “fair share” even suggested — it’s a political slogan, not a constitutional principle. The philosophical concept of “fair share” comes from the Communist maxim, “From each according to their ability, to each according to their need!” This concept is pure socialism.
• Federal funding drives curriculum. The federal influence of education is evident in “head-start” programs, school lunch programs, “no child left behind”, textbooks, and library books. Americans are being taxed to support what we call ‘public’ schools, but are actually “government force-tax-funded schools“. Even private schools are government regulated.  Whether it’s the Department of Education, the NEA and Outcome Based Education, the Marxist agenda is evident.
• Teachers’ unions promote political agendas
• Parental authority is increasingly challenged

Education has become a tool for cultural transformation.

A Christian Warning

From a biblical worldview, Marxism conflicts with:

• Private stewardship (Genesis 1:28)
• Family inheritance (Proverbs 13:22)
• Individual responsibility (2 Thessalonians 3:10)
• God‑given liberty (Galatians 5:1)

The concern is not merely political — it is spiritual. Centralized power replaces God with the State, and personal responsibility with collective obligation.

Conclusion: The Slow Drift

Although America has not adopted communism outright, it has absorbed its principles gradually through:

• Federal expansion
• Cultural shifts
• Economic centralization
• Political rhetoric
• Educational influence

The result is a nation drifting from constitutional liberty toward ideological frameworks that resemble Marx’s original planks.

As believers, we are called to watch, warn, and stand firm. The slow drift toward Marxist ideology is not merely political — it is spiritual. Every plank represents a step away from God‑given liberty and toward centralized control. The Church must remain awake, discerning the times, and anchored in the truth that Christ alone is King.