#JesusChangedMyLife 2020

* A short video on Good Friday 2020 about what Jesus means to me.

* Also see my piece I mention: Keeping Faith While Growing Up Evangelical: Reflections on My Journey.

Karl Marx and Marxism--Some Notes

* Notes for a lecture on Marx and Marxism.

Karl Marx and Marxism

·     Karl Marx (1818-1883)

o   Grandfathers on both sides were rabbis

o   Father was a lawyer

o   “Following a Prussian decree of 1816 which banned Jews from the higher ranks of law and medicine, he became a Protestant and on 26 August 1824 he had his six children baptized.  Marx was confirmed at fifteen and for a time seems to have been a passionate Christian.”[1]

·     Karl Marx is the key figure in the formation of Marxism

o   Note: there has been development of his ideas and different intellectual heirs

o   C. Stephen Evans notes[2]:

§ Differences in Marxists

·     free thinkers; democracy 

·     “Stalinists”; totalitarianism

§ Differences in …

·     Theory: supposed to benefit working people and enable them to gain economic control over their own lives

·     Practice: bureaucratic rigidities of life; economic stagnation; loss of personal freedom

·     Two major intellectual influences on Marx

o   Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1830)

§ Human history was guided an absolute Spirit

§ Followed a dialectical process

·     Thesis – Antithesis –Synthesis 

o   Ludwig Feuerbach (1804-1872)

§ Materialist

§ God is a projection of human potentiality; an expression of our unrealized ideals

§ Criticized Hegel’s philosophical idealism

·     “Spirit” is simply a secularized version of the Christian God

o   Marx accepts Feuerbach’s critique of religion and his atheism

o   Marx turns Hegel “right side up”

§ Not “Spirit” guiding/manifesting in history

§ Materialism in history

·     Historical and Dialectical interpretation of history; “Historical Materialism”

·     Economics is the key lens for Marx through which he views history

o   “Economic factors are the primary determinants of that history.  Since human beings are material, their lives must be understood in terms of the need to work to satisfy their material needs.”[3]

§ Dialectical Materialism

Thesis	Antithesis	Synthesis
Bourgeoisie Capitalists; property-owning class	Proletariat Workers who must sell their labor to survive	Communism Classless society; people who work and own the means of production in common

·     Overview of Marx’s view of history

o   Originally: small human communities with no private property

o   As society develops so do technology 

§ Technology leads to a division of labor

§ Some in society control the tools or resources

·     Those who control can exploit others

o   Division of labor and consequent control over the means of production leads to social classes

§ History for Marx is the history of class struggle

§ Society is dominated by the class that controls the means of production

o   Medieval feudalism historically led to Modern industrial society

§ Conflict seen in the French Revolution

§ Establishment of the Middle Class who control the means of production (Capitalism)

o   Capitalism needs a body of property-less workers (proletariat) to exploit

§ Capitalism grows wealth and leads to a society in which more is produced than can be purchased

·     Overproduction leads to unemployment and suffering

·     Proletariat is forced to revolt thus leading to Communism

o   This revolution is different

§ Past: One social class overthrows another and then becomes the oppressor

§ Final revolution: the Proletariat is the majority

·     No vested interest in the old order

·     They abolish the whole system of class oppression

o   Creates “the new socialist individual”

o   “People will supposedly be less individualistic and competitive, more apt to find fulfillment in working for the good of others.  The ‘alienation’ of all previous societies will be overcome, and a new and higher form of human life will emerge.”[4]

·     Marxism has been called a “Christian heresy”

o   Kingdom of God without God and Jesus Christ!

o   Atheist philosopher, Bertrand Russell commented…

§ “Marx professed himself an atheist, but retained a cosmic optimism which only theism could justify.”[5]

o   Historian Paul Johnson: for Marx the proletariat is “… a redemptive force which has no history, is not subject to historical laws and ultimately ends history—in itself, curiously enough, a very Jewish concept, the proletariat being the Messiah or redeemer.”[6]

·     C. Stephen Evans lists out three reasons why Marxism was so appealing to so many for so long[7]:

o   “Marx had a deep understanding of the human need for genuine community and for fulfillment in work.”

o   “He was sensitive not merely to the problem of poverty but to the loss of dignity that occurs when human beings are seen merely as cogs in a vast industrial machine.”

o   “He looked for a society in which people would creatively express themselves in their work and see in their work an opportunity to help others as well as themselves.”

·     Problems with Marx’s views

o   No real basis for expecting that history is moving toward the positive goal he thinks it is

§ No personalized Providence

o   No basis for morality to critique other cultures

§ “As a naturalist, he views morality as simply a product of human culture.  There are no transcendent values that can be used as a basis for critically evaluating culture.  Yet Marx himself often seems full of moral indignation as he looks at the excesses of capitalism.  What is the basis for Marx’s condemnation of capitalism if such moral notions as ‘justice’ and ‘fairness’ are just ideological inventions?”[8]

o   Faulty view of human nature and its fundamental problem

§ “The question is whether Marx’s view of human nature and analysis of the human problem go deep enough.  Is it really plausible to think that selfishness and greed are solely a product of scarcity and class division?  Is it really possible to make human beings fundamentally good if we have the right environment for them?”[9]

·     Problems with Marx’s scholarship

o   “In any case, Marx brought to the use of primary and secondary written sources the same spirit of gross carelessness, tendentious distortion and downright dishonesty which marked Engel’s work. Indeed they were often collaborator’s in deception, though Marx was the more audacious forger.”[10]

o   Two Cambridge scholars in the 1880’s looked at chapter 15 in Marx’s Capital.  Paul Johnson cites their work in the following quotation:

§ “They discovered that the differences between the Blue Book texts and Marx’s quotations from them were not the result solely of inaccuracy but ‘showed signs of a distorting influence.’  In one class of cases they found that quotations had often been ‘conveniently shortened by the omission of passages which would be likely to weigh against the conclusions which Marx was trying to establish.’  Another category ‘consists in piecing together fictitious quotations out of isolated statements contained in different parts of a Report. These are then foisted upon the reader in inverted commas with all the authority of direct quotations from the Blue Books themselves.’  On one topic, the sewing machine, ‘he uses the Blue Books with a recklessness which is appalling … to prove just the contrary of what they really establish.’  They concluded that their evidence might not be ‘sufficient to sustain a charge of deliberate falsification’ but certainly showed ‘an almost criminal recklessness in the use of authorities’ and warranted treating any ‘other parts of Marx’s work with suspicion.’”[11]

__________________________

NOTE: I wrote the following short essay for a class.

Marx

 

The thought of Karl Marx (1818-1883) has been called a “Christian heresy” since it both mimics and is parasitic of genuine historic Christian orthodoxy.  It can, therefore, be helpful to utilize the rubric of “Creation-Fall-Redemption-Restoration” to analyze Marxism in an effort to bring out its intellectual contours.  Creation refers to the issue of origins.  Fallconcerns what is the problem or plight of humanity.  Restoration seeks to answer the question of how humanity overcomes or is delivered from its plight.  Restoration refers to the historical goal—the eschatological end—toward which history is moving in light of the professed solution to humanity’s problem.

 

Creation. Karl Marx was influenced by both Georg W. F. Hegel (1770-1830) and Ludwig Feuerbach (1804-1872).  From Hegel he took the notion of a dialectical process working in history (Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis) and from Feuerbach he took his materialism, thus affirming a belief in the eternality of matter.  This combination of ideas led to a historical and dialectical interpretation of history, sometimes called “historical materialism.”  Although there is no God or Hegelian absolute Spirit, Marx does have a providential aspect to his view of history.  Marx sees everything in history through the lens of the economic. History is moving toward a glorious revolution that will usher in an economic utopia.  C. Stephen Evans insightfully notes: “Economic factors are the primary determinants of that history.  Since human beings are material, their lives must be understood in terms of the need to work to satisfy their material needs.” (Evans, The Universe Next Door, 88)

 

Fall. The plight of humanity, according to Marx, is economic class struggle.  Marx begins his Manifesto of the Communist Party with the familiar words: “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” Marx’s progression of thought is as follows.  As society develops so does technology.  This leads to a division of labor in which some control the tools and resources.  This leads to exploitation.  The division of labor and consequent control over the means of the production leads to social classes with attendant class struggle.  Medieval feudalism historically led to modern industrial society. Industrial society’s capitalism, with its bourgeoisie who own the means of production, produces a need for a property-less class of workers—the proletariat—who are exploited.  Not only does overproduction lead to unemployment and suffering, the type of work offered to the proletariat “has lost all individual character, and, consequently, all charm for the workmen. Marx speaks of “alienation” of the workers.  This alienation affects workers in their relationships with others and, even, themselves.  This also creates tensions in society between rural and urban settings and even between larger cultural units—the “East” and the “West.”

 

Redemption. For Marx, the ultimate good is a classless society with economic equity and fulfillment.  The key to overcoming the class struggle and alienation is revolution.  Marx continually speaks of revolution, struggle, and violence as the means to overcome the class struggle.  This is the way history changes and advances.  The following is a but a taste of Marx’s revolutionary rhetoric:

 

“In depicting the most general phases of the development of the proletariat, we traced the more or less veiled civil war, raging within existing society, up to the point where that war breaks out into open revolution, and where the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation for the swath of the proletariat.”

 

One might even consider Marx’s view as one of regeneration through revolution.  Human nature is material but malleable—even perfectible—through the forces of revolution.

 

Restoration. Marx’s view can accurately be described as “revolutionary utopianism.”  The historical process with its revolutionary character moved by economic forces is moving to a goal (telos).  Marx believes that the bourgeoisie program is ultimately self-defeating in that it “cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products.”  For Marx, what the bourgeoisie produces “is its own gravediggers.”  The final revolution in which the proletariat are victorious somehow changes the social dynamic forever—thus, its utopian character.  C. Stephen Evans notes:

 

“People will supposedly be less individualistic and competitive, more apt to find fulfillment in working for the good of others.  The ‘alienation’ of all previous societies will be overcome, and a new and higher form of human life will emerge.”  (Evans, The Universe Next Door, 90)

 

How all this is possible given Marx’s materialistic atheism is never adequately explained.  Dr. Owen Anderson argues that Marx’s analysis of history and change is limited by his materialist assumptions.  Even the atheistic philosopher Bertrand Russell noticed this dynamic with Marx’s thought when he wrote, “Marx professed himself an atheist, but retained a cosmic optimism which only theism could justify.” (A History of Western Philosophy, 788-789).

---

     [1]Paul Johnson, Intellectuals(New York: Harper & Row, 1988), 53.

     [2]Much of this outline comes from James W. Sire The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalog—5^thed. (Downers Grove, Ill.: Intervarsity Press, 2009)—C. Stephen Evans wrote the section on Marxism on pages 86-92.

     [3]C. Stephen Evans in The Universe Next Door, 88.

     [4]C. Stephen Evans in The Universe Next Door, 90.

     [5]Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy(Simon and Schuster, 1945), 788-789.

     [6]Paul Johnson, Intellectuals(New York: Harper & Row, 1988), 58.

     [7]C. Stephen Evans in The Universe Next Door, 90.

     [8]C. Stephen Evans in The Universe Next Door, 91.

     [9]C. Stephen Evans in The Universe Next Door, 91

     [10]Paul Johnson, Intellectuals(New York: Harper & Row, 1988), 66.

     [11]Paul Johnson, Intellectuals(New York: Harper & Row, 1988), 67.