Marxists of various flavors seem to spend as much time arguing with each other (and killing each other) as they do arguing with (and killing) their ideological opponents. Despite all the rhetoric about solidarity, it really seems to be a system created by and for people who do not get along with other people very well. I'm not sure it's even much of a threat anymore. The most successful collectivists seem to be the softer "social democratic" parties. Marxists fight like boys. Social democrats fight like girls.

OOh la la: "Monster from the Id"? I used to be on the Left, and it is true that the "narcissism of small differences" obtains. But see <a href="http://clarespark.com/2013/02/23/peter-gays-freud/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://clarespark.com/2013/02/23/peter-gays-freud/</a>, for I apply class analysis to Freudian categories that his followers could have thought up by themselves.

"Marxists of various flavors seem to spend as much time arguing with each other (and killing each other) as they do arguing with (and killing) their ideological opponents. "

As Woody Allen once said "You say that like it's a negative thing."

I think we should encourage - and even celebrate - their rivalries. Anything that weakens them is in our interest. I don't want to think about how much additional damage they could have done if they'd truly been united. They did more than enough harm despite their conflicts with one another.

That can also be said of Muslims. No wonder they get along so well.

It could be said of Christians as well. Met any Huguenots lately?

Conflict need not come from disagreement. It can come from the unanimity of belief in the moral and social propriety of force... and in societies based on arbitrary beliefs not amenable to such things as proof, evidence or reason, it is inevitable.

I think we've had enough history in point of this fact.