In the May 2011 edition of this journal, Curry Malott contributed an essay review of Jean Anyon's "Marx and Education" (2011). The author would summarize Mallot's critiques of her book as follows: (1) she didn't write the book that he wanted her to write; (2) she didn't cite the authors that he wanted her to cite; and (3) her work is anti-Marxist because her take on the literature isn't identical to his. While his intention was to expose her book as undermining Marxist analysis even as she sought to support it, Malott's essay is actually more successful as an example of the dangers of sectarianism and of the tendency on the Left to purge those viewed as not sufficiently conforming to orthodoxy in their positions. In this article, the author examines the problems in Malott's essay. While some of Malott's (2011) criticisms of "Marx and Education" (Anyon, 2011) merit consideration, at least as drawing attention to the need for greater clarity of language and position, they tend towards gross overstatements of the significance of any errors she may have made. This overreaching seems to occur primarily because he draws conclusions as to the meaning and implications of written statements in the book that are not reasonable given what Anyon actually wrote, misrepresents the positions of various critical scholars in the effort to support his arguments, and makes arguments and reaches conclusions that are not logical or consistent. More troubling than this, however, is that Malott leaves the impression that he believes there is some sort of unified vanguard of Marxist educational scholars, consisting of himself and others who read Marx correctly, and claims the right to cast out as enemies of Marxism anyone who might deviate from their views. (Contains 27 footnotes.)