How about a compromise: middle-class men and Marxists both trend totalitarian.

From Michael Weiss's Democratiya piece on Edmund Wilson's politics, an interesting question about totalitarian tendencies among socialists:

Was it his fundamental middle-class nature, as Marx would have argued, or his socialist instinct for despotism, as Flaubert had it, that led [Senecal] to sell out his comrades on the barricades, put down the June Riots and, 'like certain radicals turned fascists,' realise that 'strong centralization of government is already a kind of communism and that authority is in itself a great thing'? By 1948, Wilson, as we shall see in a moment, was firmly in Flaubert's camp on this question.

Not to play up neocon/Marxist consonance more than absolutely necessary, but Allan Bloom's definition of the bourgeois man might be important here: "the man who, when dealing with others, thinks only of himself, and on the other hand, in his understanding of himself, thinks only of others."