Why the ‘Labubu’ at Karl Marx’s grave is such hilarious irony.

Isabel Lattimer, Contributor,    Hana Syed, Political Editor

That sentence should never be repeated because it is both ironic and chronically online.

For a quick explanation of what a ‘Labubu’ actually is, they are collectable plastic toys and are arguably the epitome of modern consumer culture. The company that produces and sells them has limited stock, and they can be resold online for upwards of £500 each - essentially, manufactured scarcity.

One thing you would not expect to be on the grave of the man who is seen as ‘The Father of Communism’ is the current symbol of Western material capitalism. Or would you?

Is that surprising? Maybe it was meant ironically, a symbol of how out of hand capitalism has become today – especially in the US. With the rise of social media in its ability to dictate trends, which have a huge, tangible impact on the economy, it is not surprising that the most recent symbol of this has been placed at the grave of one of the writers behind ‘The Communist Manifesto’.

If this act was intended to be ironic, then bravo, because it is almost poetic. If not, it is worth thinking about what this means. Marx wrote about commodity fetishism, which is the way we give inanimate objects almost mystical value under capitalism. A Labubu is exactly that: plastic moulded into a shape, sold for hundreds purely because it is rare and popular on today’s social media. Popularity, though, does not mean the trend is without criticism. There are countless videos on TikTok, specifically of people discussing how they think they are being tricked and that no one really likes these toys, and it is just a test to see how far companies can push their consumers. Because, after all, ‘who would want to spend their money on something that expensive when it looks like THAT?’ (Not my words, the wise words of a TikTok user’s comment, which, annoyingly, I cannot find anymore.)

If someone was blissfully unaware of the irony of this act, it is increasingly more difficult to tell the difference. Was this someone who wanted to make a powerful display of the state of the world today, and how consumed people are by material possessions? Or did they just want a photo that they knew would get noticed? Social media collapses everything into content - Marx becomes the backdrop, and the Labubu becomes the prop. The grave is no longer a site of reflection on the life of Marx, but a spot for a viral photo.

Don’t get me wrong, people are allowed to enjoy and consume things, even when they are a ‘trend’. But that’s not the issue here. We have seen this many times - when an image becomes a trend in a society, which divorces the symbol from its original meaning (Marx = Communism, Labubu’s = Capitalism, etc.), it becomes both powerless and even more powerful.

And maybe that is the real irony: Marx wrote extensively about commodity fetishism, the way objects gain a power that goes beyond their use. A Labubu, which is essentially just a plastic toy, has achieved near-religious status in the online marketplace. To leave one at Marx’s grave could be the purest, most unintentional performance of the system he critiqued.

This is not the first time capitalism has done this. In the case of Marx and the Labubu, and Che Guevara (which I will get to in a second), the irony holds the power. Alone, Marx’s grave was a symbol of Communist ideology, and alone was powerful enough, yet when the Labubu was placed next to it, it just made it into another rage bait photo op, and people only see the trend rather than what is directly in front of them; the irony staring back at them. When this irony is acknowledged, in this case, it highlights Marx’s argument, and makes his life’s work, and importantly, his death, an even more powerful symbol of the dangers of materialism and unbridled capitalism.

Guevara, the Argentine Marxist revolutionary, was literally fighting to overthrow capitalist systems, yet his face has been mass‐produced on T‐shirts, phone cases, and even coffee mugs. Half the people wearing that famous red‐and‐black image probably couldn’t tell you what he stood for, but they will buy it at Urban Outfitters for £54.99 or cheaply mass-produced on Amazon with next-day delivery.

The same system Marx critiqued turned Che into a brand. It is almost poetic in its hypocrisy: the revolutionary reduced to a logo, to be plastered all over material products. And that’s what makes the Labubu at Marx’s grave feel so fitting. Capitalism does not just sell things; it absorbs its critics, repackaging their image, or even their grave, as an aesthetic commodity.

Maybe that is the ultimate irony: capitalism can even turn Marx’s grave into a ‘memeable’ location. In a world where everything is marketable content, it is almost inevitable that a limited‐edition toy ends up there: whether as a joke, a political statement, or just for the likes.

If you want to see commodity fetishism in action, you do not need to reread Das Kapital; you just need to open TikTok. The Labubu craze, like the Che T‐shirt before it, shows how capitalism does not destroy its enemies; it just sells them back to us.

Check out Isabel's links 👉 https://www.linkedin.com/in/izzy-lattimer-674953284?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_app👉 https://politicallyspeaking6.wordpress.com/

Check out Hana's LinkedIn 👉 https://www.linkedin.com/in/hana-syed-59716a35b/