The world is dealing with followers of Gramsci, not Marx.

It is incorrect to call today’s leftists neo-Marxists or neo-Bolsheviks. Marx is entirely absent from their strategy. It would be far more accurate to call them Gramscists, since they act guided precisely by the ideas of Antonio Gramsci. It was he who came up with the idea that to seize power, it is not necessary to storm palaces; instead, one must infiltrate publishing houses, newspapers, universities—and then, after some time, power itself will become left-wing. It was he who invented using minorities, “subaltern” groups, to destabilize the situation. These are quasi-social strata that can easily be created from anyone—from beer lovers, to those who enjoy having sex with Christmas trees, or opponents of washing. External differences are not essential; the main thing is that they all have the same filling in their heads: hatred toward everyone who is successful, prosperous, working, and thinking differently.

The Marxist label is apparently used as a catch-all for left-wing movements that start from Marx's ideas but heavily transform them, adding cultural, identity-based, and postmodern elements. However, the roots of their approach are indeed closer to Gramsci and his ideas of cultural hegemony. It is all written in the Prison Notebooks: gradually take over cultural institutions. This is the famous “long march through the institutions,” as later formulated by the followers of Gramscianism (in particular, Rudi Dutschke). He believed that control over culture and public consciousness is more important than economic revolution, because culture shapes the worldview of the masses. Hence the modern left's emphasis on media, academia, pop culture, and the “moral superiority” of their narratives.

The so-called “alternative groups,” “subaltern” ones—these are not necessarily a class in the Marxian sense, but any marginalized or “aggrieved” groups that can be mobilized to shake up the status quo. Gramsci spoke of the subaltern—subordinate groups (peasants, marginalized people, etc.), and today this has extended to any "oppressed" identities, even artificially constructed ones. The main thing is to create a sense of grievance and direct it against “the system,” even if that system has long ceased to be pure capitalism as in Marx.

So, yes, Gramscists… And it is precisely the Prison Notebooks, not Capital, that are more relevant today for study by those who want to understand where this strategy will lead.