Henry Imler September 26th, 2007

Marx’s theories stand and fall as one, or do they? Pals is very adamant that one must evaluate the totality of Marx’s theories instead of isolating and evaluating any one part. This implies, and is explicitly stated by Pals, that if one log goes rolling down the hill, the entire cabin will come rolling after it. However, is really the case, or does it suffer from the same critique Pals applied to Marx’s theory of religion?

The philosophic base of Marx’s theory was an innovative synthesis of Hegel idea of alienation absolute spirit and Feuerbach’s critique of absolute spirit. Hegel provided the process; Feuerbach aligned the process; and Marx discovered the “why” powering the process. For all its empirical problems, Marx’s synthesis had two redeeming virtues, the human work as a value of humanity, and the process of its alienation. This is surprising for a person that grew up during the collapse of the Soviet Union, had read Rand’s We the Living, and found constant references to the natural greed of the bourgeoisie attached to the theory. This creates a public perception that Marx had a low view of humanity. In reality, he maintained quite the opposite. Humans, while by nature were alienated, echoing Rousseau’s classic zinger, “Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains;” there is hope to realize their full humanity, as exemplified in Marx’s promise that, “[they] have nothing to lose but their chains.” Marx realizes this will be no easy process and that it might be bloody, violent, and take hundreds of years. However, the final result is as inevitable as it is justified.

Religion is part of what Marx called a society’s super-structure; therefore, a society’s religion was dictated by the society’s economic system, or base. Religion serves to placate the poor and justify the rule of the powerful for Marx. Marx purposefully ignores the “oughts” of religion and only focuses on the “is” of religion. Marx only cares about the roles and function relgion plays in society. It is here that he makes a fundamental mistake. In various religions, there are warning and exhortations against the abuse of the poor and injustice on the part of the powerful. Marx skips over the possible effects of Luke’s warning to those that are rich and laugh now, for they will mourn and weep. Marx would do well to exhort also the religious, not only the philosophers that the point of all of this is to change the world. In doing so, Marx also misses the subtle and important ways religion works to resist an unjust social order.

It is not the case that problems with the outworking of Marx’s social theory necessarily invalidate the rest of his theory. It only necessitates an attempt to modify the theory. Perhaps it is the case that the whole kit ‘n caboodle needs to be thrown out, or it might be the case that only parts of it need to be overhauled. It seems to be the case that Marx’s solution to human alienation needs to be readdressed in its particulars, however, Marx does have some interesting and perceptive insights into humans living in a capitalistic culture.

• Religion
• Comments(0)