In-Vitro Fetishisation
A Marxist argument against IVF
Quick note: It’s important to note that Marx’s concept of ‘commodity fetishism’ stands apart from, and does not rely on, his ‘theory of value’. This latter theory forms the basis for concepts such as ‘class struggle’ and ‘historical materialism.’ Interestingly, even some of Marx’s fiercest critics, such as Hayek, von Böhm-Bawerk, and MacIntyre acknowledged the validity of commodity fetishism while simultaneously dismantling Marx’s theory of value and its by-products.
The crisis of our times is economic, geopolitical, and aesthetic; but, foremost, it is ethical. In these lean times, the battle lines are drawn not just over who’s right or wrong, good or bad, but over the very essence of what it means to be alive.
The rubber of reality screeched against the asphalt of ethics once again when Alabama’s justices laid down a ruling: in vitro fertilization (IVF) embryos are, unequivocally, children. This decree opened a rift in the right, pitting libertarians against conservatives on a battlefield few saw coming.
To conservatives, these ‘unborn children’ are ‘babies’ even before their first cry. They see an embryo for what it is—a stage in human life we all have been through, an organism with a unique DNA.
To libertarians, calling embryos ‘unborn children’ is a sentimental act since embryos are just a collection of cells in a petri dish—too distant to be loved, too abstract to be human. “You can’t cuddle an embryo,” their placards say, as if that settles it. It isn’t human. It’s an object, a thing. At best, a commodity belonging to an unspecified species.
But this debate isn’t just about semantics. It is a matter of life and death, after all. We all know that. So libertarians twist and shout, claiming ‘science’ has been reduced to personal beliefs by the Alabama ruling, which they see as the imposition of a private, religious ethic on everyone. They accuse conservatives of wishing it’s 1955 again, yet they’re the ones turning back the clock on two millennia of Western Civilization while elevating their own brand of Scientism to the gospel truth. The irony is thick, really.
This ruling isn’t a win for religious thought over reason. It’s a reminder that the scientific and philosophical principles that underpin our understanding of the world cannot be dismissed as mere ‘private ethics’ by virtue of claiming the mantle of science.
Enter the Human Life Protection Act enacted in 2022, Alabama’s bold response to Dobbs, enshrining “the sanctity of unborn life, including unborn life that exists outside the womb,” rooting its laws in the ancient wisdom of the Hippocratic Oath. This isn't about private ethics; it's about recognizing the universal truths of natural law, truths that libertarians, in their hubris, continuously dismiss at their peril.
In the ensuing chaos, woke Marxists see their chance. With libertarians veering left on IVF, it's time for a new alliance. So here's a thought: Why not reach out to the old guard Marxists? Why not form a coalition against the commodification of life itself? Call it ‘People for the Ethical Treatment of Humans.’ It's time to bridge the divide, to unite against the market forces turning life into just another product. Because let's face it, the shift of blue-collar hearts to the populist right is the real game-changer of our time… [Read more]
Well said.
However, without the action of a Jural Assembly on your state, commonwealth or territory taking back your unalienable rights from the powers that should not be it remains, Words without appropriate action.
I yield.