During her 2024 campaign, Kamala Harris stated, "What can be unburdened by what has been." At first glance, this seems like a straightforward message of optimism and progress. However, upon closer examination, it reflects a more profound ideology that aligns with Marxist thought—casting off the past to create an equitable future.
Harris's words imply more than progress within existing systems; they require radical liberation from their foundations. In Marxist ideology, dismantling the old is necessary to build a new social order. Marx famously said through the character of Mephistopheles in Goethe's Faust, "Everything that exists deserves to perish."
Harris echoes a softer version of this idea, proposing that we achieve social justice not through re form but by redesigning the entire power structure. To fully grasp the implications of this, we need to explore how Marxist dialectics have made inroads into modern American political thought, often without recognition, and now its resurgence.
Karl Marx critiqued capitalist society by arguing that history burdens the present. He believed that systems and institutions from the past—especially capitalism—oppressed the working class and per petuated inequality. These structures maintained the power of the elite and kept the masses sub servient. Marx argued that true liberation could only happen by breaking these “chains."
Harris's call to be "unburdened" reflects Marx's view of history as a weight cast off and the capital ist state not as an imperfect entity but as a tool of oppression that protected the wealth and power of the elite. His revolutionary vision sought to dismantle these structures and create a society where
Page 1 of 4
all could thrive equally. While Harris may not explicitly endorse the Marxist revolution, her rhetoric suggests a desire to break free from historical constraints to achieve equity.
Her focus on "equity" over "equality" signals a fundamental ideological shift that mirrors Marxist principles. In traditional American discourse, equality means providing everyone with the same op portunities. Equity, conversely, focuses on guaranteeing equal outcomes, often enforcing political powers to achieve this goal.
Marx argued that equal opportunity within a capitalist framework would never suffice because the system inherently favored the powerful. Similarly, Harris's advocacy for equity suggests she supports the reshaping of society to fit new ideological parameters to ensure everyone receives the same re sult, regardless of individual effort or circumstance.
In Marx's theory, the state is the mechanism to overturn the system. He believed that the working class, or proletariat, must rise to overthrow the bourgeoisie and take control of the government. The revolution would lead to the state's eventual "withering away" as society transitioned from socialism to communism. Marx envisioned a complete rupture with the past, leading to a new social order.
Harris's rhetoric about "what can be" suggests a similar break with history. She doesn't just advocate for improvements within America's current systems; she implies that we must transcend them alto gether. When addressing systemic racism, gender, or economic inequality, Harris suggests that these issues are so deeply entrenched they require an overhaul of the system.
Ironically, this new power structure seems designed to favor her party.
Page 2 of 4
Her statement, "What can be, unburdened by what has been," encapsulates a vision of the future that demands liberation from the historical lessons that have shaped society. Though she may not be aware of hard-core Marxist doctrine, Harris's rhetoric draws heavily from themes central to his ide ology: believing that true progress comes only through dismantling these structures.
Harris's focus on equity, as opposed to equality, mirrors Marx's critique that capitalism can never offer genuine equality. Her vision seeks to enforce and guarantee equal, fair outcomes, especially re garding race, gender, and economic status. Like Marx, Harris views the past not as a source of wis dom but as a burden to discard.
"Unburdened by what has been” will resonate with those who view the current American political and economic system as insufficient to address systemic inequality. However, her rhetoric danger ously aligns with Marxist themes, which seek to dismantle existing institutions in favor of untested ideologies. As George Santayana famously warned, “Those who cannot remember the past are con demned to repeat it.”
Harris's call to cast off history risks ignoring the valuable lessons experience offers, potentially lead ing society down a destructive path rather than genuine progress. The desire to start anew is not in herently dangerous, but doing so without the wisdom of history can result in unintended and often
tragic consequences. Santayana's additional words, “Only the dead have seen the end of war,” remind us that the struggles of history may repeat if we discard them too hastily.
Harris's future vision may contain a well-intentioned desire for fairness and justice. But ignoring the lessons of the past invites chaos. Real progress must acknowledge history, not discard it.