agreed, and I think him talking about "Marxist intellectuals" poisons his own well to an extent because he's bringing an ideological conflict into what seems to have mostly been a reason and science-based argument.
[edit] also as a side note the lineage between Marxism and progressivism is open and provable. The story about how it came about, not so much (as far as I'm aware).
Ah, the story. But what about the facts? Aren't we supposed to be having a rational discussion here rather than telling stories?