It's also such a dishonest reading of Marx. There is a difference between "patriarchy" in the sense of the basic social order of primitive agrarian societies, in which men and women were essentially the primary caste distinction, and "patriarchy" in the sense of the institutionalized sexism of the modern day, which is a vector of class oppression rather than a hard distinction.
Marx talks about the other form of patriarchy in the Manifesto too, when he talks about marriage. The primary reason marriage is such a point of consternation for Marx and Marxists is that it is a patriarchal institution!
Mind you, there is a lot more wrong with what he said than just that, but the fact that the very same text he is quoting -- which is both short and simple -- clearly contradicts him demonstrates that he is either deeply illiterate (which I doubt) or intentionally dishonest.
It's also such a dishonest reading of Marx. There is a difference between "patriarchy" in the sense of the basic social order of primitive agrarian societies, in which men and women were essentially the primary caste distinction, and "patriarchy" in the sense of the institutionalized sexism of the modern day, which is a vector of class oppression rather than a hard distinction.
Marx talks about the other form of patriarchy in the Manifesto too, when he talks about marriage. The primary reason marriage is such a point of consternation for Marx and Marxists is that it is a patriarchal institution!
Mind you, there is a lot more wrong with what he said than just that, but the fact that the very same text he is quoting -- which is both short and simple -- clearly contradicts him demonstrates that he is either deeply illiterate (which I doubt) or intentionally dishonest.