this is definitely controversial, you got that down

you're arguing for something extremely non-conventional among philosophers themselves - without sufficient arguments to make anyone believe you. That doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means people won't take you as seriously

one thing i would say, where you would likely agree, is that most people calling themselves Marxist are not well-versed enough to argue for their Marxist or Marx-influenced philosophy - if Lenin wasn't confident in his Marxism without starting to understand Hegel's Greater Logic... I think we all know what I'm implying here

What you're arguing for here sounds like something that requires several months of studying philosophers from their own works. You can go even further and argue something like Derrida, that maybe we've all been reading philosophers who misread their contemporaries who misread their contemporaries and so on and so forth.

This isn't something I myself am well-versed enough to do, so all I can do is wish you luck on this one