It may not be particular “Marxist” though Marxist thought has become so embeded in so many branches of liberal, “progressive” and politically correct thinking that it becomes hard to be sure of the philosophical pedigree anymore.
But, like Marx, it - destruction of marriage - is from the view of the artificial, engineered man, that must be preceded by man without any moorings. It is impossible to create, to engineer a “new man” unless you have destroyed what supports organic human civilization.
What Marx did not understand, and neither do the practitioners of all the schools of thought who use Marx as a base, is that their social engineering agenda will always fail, because it goes against human nature. They may not see it immediately, do to some short term success, but it cannot create sustainable societies.
Concur fully. The failure of the Soviet experiment and of their grandiose, hybristic effort to create a "new Soviet man" was comprehensive and detailed, not tactical. But the Western Marxists insist on pushing forward the old COMINTERN agenda and refusing to read their mail from home.
"Socialism in one country" didn't work. It won't work in two, or three, or six, either.
I wonder how long Hesychasmism persisted in the Byzantine Empire -- what was left of it -- after the movement had passed its crisis, and failed? Something worth thinking about, as the remains of the Communist International keep beavering away at the destruction of the West.