Culture > Western Culture

Marx and Possibility vs Reality

Marxists ignore reality and morality.

Anthony J. DeBlasi | March 20, 2026

“The seat of knowledge,” said William Hazlitt (1778-1830), “is in the head, of wisdom in the heart. We are sure to judge wrong, if we do not feel right.” What does “feeling right” mean in a head stuck in politics, and what wisdom can ensue from a cold heart? Does “feeling right” link up with the practice of doing what is right for humanity when the realities of being human are ignored, a habit typical of the Left? 

At the heart of the matter, ordinarily misframed as a conflict between liberals and conservatives, is the essential difference between ethics structured on the politics of the day and ethics based on centuries of human experience. The “progressive” mindset ignores the organic unity between generations while the “conservative” stance is mindful of the vital continuity between one generation and the next. The one assigns progress to a vertical Now, while the other places it into a horizontal Always.

Which of the two stances of mind and heart comes closer to getting what is “right” and what is “wrong,” what is “acceptable” and what is “unacceptable,” what is “justified” and what is “unwarranted” in political and social action? Is it the mindset that disregards consequences to people of predetermined actions toward “progress,” or is it the outlook that puts consequences of action to people at the top of the list of priorities? 

Graphic: Karl Marx. Wikimedia Commons.org. John Jabez Edwin Mayall (1813-1901). Public Domain.

A value missing from the equations of Marxists and would-be scientists regarding human conduct is the forgotten value of morality, lost........

© American Thinker