Materialism
and the Affective Life
Materialism is an ethical and
logical system that offers the richest life possible. To concentrate on this life is the moral
center of materialism. The focus is on
actual existence, with an absorbing awareness of social commitment. This is to devise a way of shaping our lives
to make each day filled with a meaning that transcends our individual
lives. There is no need for the
spiritual realm, higher power or divine guidance. The ethical life of materialism is one based
upon love for this world, which we are a part.
Anything beyond the material realm is only a distraction. Once this path is chosen it becomes the best
life possible. Materialism is more than
a logical and scientific understanding of existence, it is being part of
something outside the self, which is greater than the self. We are too much a part of this life and this
world to gain anything from a higher power or a soul.
Central
to Christianity is the sect of death (eternal life) of the individual. This obsession with death both reflects a
natural fear and also an unnatural increase in the dread of death to absurd
proportions. Once that fear becomes
unmanageable the Christian clergy, scared texts, and holy rituals are presented
to offer hope. Control over the people
by an unproductive elite becomes more complete.
Except through faith in Christian dogma and the clergy who teach this
creed there is no salvation. Death is
everywhere in the teachings, and this life becomes secondary (Cameron,
1995).
Christianity
early adopted a language of symbolic innuendo that both reflected and
heightened the human dread of death, a language that blended with the solemnity
of black robes, gloomy cathedrals, stained glass windows, somber music and
crucifixes, created an atmospheres conducive to control by fear (Cameron, 1995:
191).
The
materialist sees death as a natural extension of life not to be feared. Life not death is the focal point, all life
being the collective rhythms of nature.
Death is the continuation of life, not through immortality of the
individual soul, but the releasing of necessary nutrients for the collective
continuation of life. New life and the
continuation of existing life are sustained by the material elements of old
life after death. The old dies to make
room for the young and the vital.
Idealism as expressed by Plato, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism or what
ever, is centered upon the dread of death and the natural decay of the material
body. Each idealist belief system has a
different strategy for salvation, but each ends with a ridiculous ego centered
obsession with the self. Whether escaping
the cycle of death and rebirth, the escape of the physical decay of the
material body, eternal annihilation, and heaven or even damnation breeds an
obsession with personal death.
To
the materialist this preoccupation with death and the attempted escape seems
bizarre for death is necessary for life to continue. We eat other living things both plant and
animal. If any species over populates it
threatens the whole ecosystem. Humans
are living things like all other living things and a part of nature. Like all of nature the same principles
apply. For the young and vital to
survive the old who have already lived must make room for them through their
death; but life continues. The
materialist ask if it is possible for us to enjoy life with out the certainty
of our individual eternal pre-existence, and it is, why is the continuation of
the soul after death necessary for a good life?
Why would anyone care what happens to their soul after they are dead? The materialist places their concern not only
on life, but a meaningful life that can only be gained through the collective
struggle to end social injustice, inequality, and human suffering. Each individual derives meaning through being
part of a larger social entity. This
meaning comes from being part of something outside the self that is greater
than the self is. Through life itself
the materialist gains a reason to live.
Because
with death all sensation ceases, the one who is dead feels no pain. Sleep is not to be feared, neither is
death. As all materialist have said at
one time or another death is not a painful misfortune for the one who died, but
for all those who survived the death of a loved one. Survivors deal with their pain of this
terrible loss by continuing to live for the community. For the materialist the individual dies but
the group survives. This means that the
self is not what is important, but the social group. The death of a loved one is profoundly devastating. Because death is necessary for the
continuation of life, the materialist never wavers in the love of the life of
the community. It is this intense love
of the life and of the living is what is important for the materialist. The survivors deal with their pain through
their hard work for the welfare of the group; this is yet another reasons
materialist say there is purpose in being part of something outside the self
that is greater than the self. With a
commitment to life one’s own death seems a petty concern (Cameron, 1995).
All
exploitive societies are divided into classes.
The exploiting classes will benefit from the fear installed in the
hearts of the exploited classes. To
separate death from life will increase that horror of death, and that unnatural
fear is easily controlled. Those who
control access to salvation will gain a great deal of power. The above statement is a short history of
Christianity. What the materialist sees
so clearly is that we continue to live in the life of the group. We live in the struggle to end social
injustice, to end inequality, and to free the victims of their throwaway lives,
which includes of the world’s destitute majority. Society is not only a reflection of the
forces and relations of production, but within society there are real material
potentials for continuing movement towards liberation. If we understand the historical structure of
a society, we can take deliberate action toward that change. Freedom from religion and liberty from the
spiritual can become the most spiritual life of all. The torment of hell is gone forever. We, all of us, are flawed and the fragile
human beings become that are important and worth of the greatest of love. We ordinary humans will change the world not
the ‘Great
Men’, holy masters, or spiritual leaders. The common folk will become the ones we look
to for our concern and leadership. Free
from a belief in God, soul, and all that frees us to a great struggle, forever
increasing freedoms.
This
struggle is defined in a way that will advance the interests of the working
class, and move toward democracy in a real and meaningful way, i.e.
socialism. Socialism becomes the goal of
our collective struggle. The fight for
socialism will always be met by the stiffest of opposition by the ruling
class. The capitalist class is highly
organized and as group very aware of their own class interests. The class-conscious worker knows for the
‘Revolution’ to succeed hard work and sacrifice is always necessary. Every individual lives in and through the
moving patterns of the structure of history.
The social setting in which they live directly molds all
individuals. In turn the passing through
life of each individual has an affect on the social whole. This means even if we are but a product of
our society, and we all make a real difference just by being alive. The revolutionary makes that difference by
choice. Each generation of socialist
revolutionaries makes real and valuable contributions to all succeeding
generations of socialist revolutionaries.
This passing of the torch of struggle means the willingness to sacrifice
life itself for the betterment of the community. The living for the larger whole is a common
sentiment and a great source of personal and moral satisfaction. Each individual life is part of the world
community, we revolutionaries know through our conscious efforts we each make a
real differences, even in reactionary times (Cameron, 1995).
Revolt
is as old as class society. Insurrection
well never ends as long as inequality remains intact. The collective effort of this struggle is the
history of which we are a part, and is intimate part of our lives. This is our purpose and the deep spiritual
meaning in our lives. Without this
continual struggle most of the rights we currently enjoy would have never have
been established. Without the continual
struggle not only will there be no further expansion upon these rights, the
ones we already have will be lost to those with wealth and power. This collective purpose comes from sharing in
the international effort to build socialism and democracy. Humans and not God is the cornerstone of a
deeply meaningful life. The survival of
the planet and all living things rests with humanity, and the decisions we make
today and everyday. There will be no
divine intervention to save us from our folly.
This awesome responsibility is the bond of humanity, that greater
something that stands out side the self, and this ends up by being the most
profoundly spiritual life possible. The
materialist who does not believe in a spirit, soul, or any kind of higher power
ends up by being the most spiritual people of all. Morality is not a gift from a non-existing
God. Morality is born out of lived
everyday experiences of real living human beings, and the natural instinct for
the survival of the group. Those who act
for the betterment of the group are looked upon as being good people. Those who pursue their own interests seem
petty by comparison. We all have both
potentials in us at all times. A
philosophy that can help us to be better than we are is very desirable. Materialism offers the most hope to achieve
this kind of living philosophy.
When
we see the universe as a self-contained and self-perpetuating entity, that is
material and non-conscious there is no need for a creator. When we see that everything in the universe,
including life, develops out of already existing natural forces in the material
sense, life becomes the beauty we live for.
Life originates from a complex natural interaction of physical,
chemical, and biological materials and evolves from one form into another. The unique phenomenon called life, becomes
our responsibility and we accept it.
There is very little likelihood that complex life exists anywhere else. We are most likely alone in the universe, and
if life ceases we all stand responsible for abandoning the struggle for social
justice. There was no divine miracle in
creation, and there will be no divine intervention to save life on this
planet. We cannot avoid our moral
responsibility through faith in a higher power.
If there is no God, creator, or higher power it is up to us each
generation to preserve all life. This
makes us, each human being more magnificent than if God did exist, because we
have the collective power to avert disaster.
Because of the likelihood of complex life arising on this planet, or
anyone of us ever being born was extremely improbable, and without a creator
each human ever born becomes far more precious.
This collective responsibility to life of the group makes all life
valuable, and the willing sacrifice of our own life for the group far
easier. The divine clouds the true
beauty of life. The wonderful beauty of
the birth of a child would only be cheapened by the existence of a higher
power. We are all linked to the
chemical-physical processes that happened at just the right time to make life
possible. Those same natural processes
are always happening within our bodies, this is life. Through the process of evolution simple elements
became more complex elements. These
complex elements formed molecules, and the molecules became the bases for
life. Life also evolved from simple to
complex and eventually humans living in a complex organization called
society. This whole process of evolution
is a natural one and a creator adds nothing and therefore is unnecessary. This means we see beauty without any need for
the supernatural. The materialist is
integrated into society and through society to all things living. We use science to make real changes,
following natural patterns and to make a better world. The non-material supernatural is not needed to
help us either as a species or as individuals in our everyday lives. This is because we are not created in the
image of God, but always remaining rooted in our animal past. The supernatural image is like a drug that
hides us from our moral responsibility, and the animal image of humanity makes
each of us a real and living organism and an existing relative to all living
things. The spiritual view is an empty
vision that leads to seeing all matter as corrupt, but the materialist is a
passionate love of life, nature, and existence.
Religion
is the utterance of the estrangement of humankind from their humanity. The essential root of this alienation is the
unjust authority used throughout the class divided economic systems upon which
we all are dependent. Religious
institutions are grounded in this exploitive domination and aid in the
preservation of that class which maintains social power, and popular religion
makes an appeal to the dispossessed mass through magical intervention into
natural events in away that favors the needs of the community. In addition some popular religions promise
salvation to the dispossessed, while official religion justify the cruelty of
class rule.
Materialism
Dialectical
Materialism states everything in the universe can be understood in terms of
mater in motion. The universe, nature and human communities are natural, thus a
part of a tangible process continually unfolding in a never-ending course of
transformance. The materialist is a
mortal in the full celebration of the human animal’s never ending interaction
with nature, and as always becoming and being a part of nature.
The
real study of history begins with the material formulation of real people
living their everyday lives. This
study begins with peoples’ relationship with nature (Marx 1947:42). Thorough these relationships with nature,
including their social nature, humans produce their own means of
subsistence. Each generation inherits
and reproduces this means of subsistence, and then changes it to fit their
changed needs (Marx 1947:42). “Human
nature” of the individual, is shaped by the specific historically and
culturally setting of a particular group.
This means that how people are organized and interact is settled by
production (Marx 1947:42).
Nature and labor are two critical aspects of the human
condition. We are human because we labor
taking what we need from nature and through our actions changing nature to fit
our needs and changing ourselves in turn.
Humans and that human society are always a part and never separate from
nature. Our social world is but an
expression of the natural world. Human beings are seen in a context as being
fully integrated into nature, a part of nature like any other species in the
ecosystem. Humans are active, proactive
and interactive within their environment in a way that transmutation of
humanity is guaranteed.
The
human condition is set in the animal and social circumstance of people. The human condition is predetermined in the
very beginning of any understanding of humanity or the individual and at every
moment is part of the continual demand placed up on human survival. The human condition is to be found at the
very beginning of hominid evolution, and is a central concern of all human
beings ever since. The human condition is that which is universal, it includes
both the biological necessity and the broad abstractions of psychological
necessity.
Marxism
claims we become human in a social setting this setting is founded upon coming
together to interact with nature. This
interaction is labor. Labor is our spiritual connection with nature, and
through labor we create ourselves physically, socially, and emotionally. Unfettered, unimpeded, lustfully creative and
aesthetically imaginative labor is fundamental to our human identity and a
universal basic need of all people.
Through labor we become we become social beings and through social
activity life is possible. Labor is both
social and material. Labor being also symbolic
culturally manifests notions of self-expression. The human animal rationally develops into a
culturally defined social being. Truly
free labor is artistic creativity and aesthetic enjoyment. (Donham: 55)
The
human condition is set in the animal and social circumstance of people. The human condition is predetermined in the
very beginning of any understanding of humanity or the individual and at every
moment is part of the continual demand placed up on human survival. The human condition is to be found at the
very beginning of hominid evolution, and is a central concern of all human
beings ever since. The human condition is that which is universal, it includes
both the biological necessity and the broad abstractions of psychological
necessity.
Labor
is both symbolic and natural. Labor is
born in combining symbols of creation with real human needs or wants. As a Dine’ person may say thinking leads to
planning, planning to action, through action the product of labor is born. Through working together in an existing
environment, to take from nature and altering it in ways to meet our needs, we
bring forth new needs in this action. It
is through this process of being human that society and cultures are created,
and only in society are we fully human.
In affinity with others can we decidedly attain our power of creativity
of expression and fully maximize our humanity. (Donham: 56)
Human
unity with nature exists through industry.
Social science must reflect this if it is to understand the deeper underlying
connections between specific social actions and global trends. In this Industry, commerce, production, and
exchange establish distribution, which in turn give birth to ideological
possibilities. Along theses lines
social-economic classes are determined by the mode of production. The needs of every class society creates its
own ideological support, with bourgeois society science develops to meet the
needs of its mode of production. This is
possible because the ruling ideas of any class society are that of the ruling
class. Those who control the material
forces of society, rule also in the ideas of that society. Workers are subject to those ideas. The dominant ideology reflects the dominant
material relations (Marx 1947: 62 -65).
The manifestations of the human conditions are defined in
the more or less specific social and cultural terms. These manifestations are continuously
historically in state of metamorphose, based upon the historical alternatives within
the dynamic of an environment that is itself historically created. The
appearance of the human condition is defined in the more or less specific
social and cultural terms. These
manifestations are continuously historically in state of metamorphose, based
upon the historical alternatives within the dynamic of an environment that is
itself historically created.
Agency is the motor of this change. Agency is the
instrument is the transmogrification of the social and cultural
environment. Agency is defined as
choice, which presupposes a limited free will, in a predetermined environment
with the option also predetermined.
The “forces of production” is seen here as the objective
part of the above process. Force of
production is the natural environment, the technology, and the demands of the population
pressure. The relations of production
are the some total of our social organizations including work organizations,
authority organization of work, property relations, and how the products are
distributed. The political culture is reflective of this interaction, as is the
ideological superstructure.
The forces of production sets the limits of what is
possible for the relations of production and in turn the relations of
production offers continual feedback to the forces of production, and changing
the nature of the forces of production.
The relation of production generates the necessity of the specifics of a
historically defined political culture.
The political culture offers direction for the relations of
production. The political culture creates
guides and controls the ideological superstructure. The ideological superstructure provides the
necessary knowledge for the operation of everything else including the forces
of production.
Culture is how humans adapt to their environment,
changing that environment, demanding and allowing humans to readapt to the
changes in the environment. This dynamic
operates within human communities as an interactive part of a larger world
nature.
This
we can say the existence of humans as a part of the world nature, humans and
all other species in greater ecosystem co-evolved. Within this dynamic the
human condition defines the social, cultural, and biological specifically and
historically defined in order for the individual to survive and the community
to meet its members needs. These needs
are met with specifics of the socio-cultural setting interacting with nature
and with other societies. This carried
out within the social setting of continual historical change. This creates the individual, born with in an
historical setting that limits the options possible. With in this dynamic the critical element is
circumscribed free will, an assertion of choice.
Marxism claims we become human in a social setting this
setting is founded upon coming together to interact with nature. This interaction is labor. Labor is our
spiritual connection with nature, and through labor we create ourselves
physically, socially, and emotionally.
Unfettered, unimpeded, lustfully creative and aesthetically imaginative
labor is fundamental to our human identity and a universal basic need of all
people. Through labor we become we
become social beings and through social activity life is possible. Labor is both social and material. Labor being also symbolic culturally
manifests notions of self-expression.
The human animal rationally develops into a culturally defined social
being. Truly free labor is artistic
creativity and aesthetic enjoyment. (Donham: 55)
The
above blends the determinism of historical sociology, with an element of inescapable
freedom, made popular by the existentialists.
Bring labor into this synthesis labor becomes the unity of freedom and
determinism. Labor is both symbolic and natural. Labor is born in combining symbols of
creation with real human needs or wants.
As a Dine’ person may say thinking leads to planning, planning to
action, through action the product of labor is born. Through working together in an existing
environment, to take from nature and altering it in ways to meet our needs, we
bring forth new needs in this action. It
is through this process of being human that society and cultures are created,
and only in society are we fully human.
In affinity with others can we decidedly attain our power of creativity
of expression and fully maximize our humanity. (Donham: 56)
Agency is the motor of this change. Agency is the
instrument is the transmogrification of the social and cultural
environment. Agency is defined as
choice, which presupposes a limited free will, in a predetermined environment
with the option also predetermined. Agency is the core of social labor. We
produce, make happen, alter, create and ultimately bring forth ourselves
through labor. Thought and action
through labor produces new thought and action continuously. Culture through communication, and collective
expressive validity, which creates meaning, that becomes basic to the cultural
explanations and socially knowledgeable people who in turn produce themselves
by creating culture (Donham: 57).
People make individual choices; particular choices with a
view toward attain certain ends. These
ends vary within and between cultures as historical situations evolve and
change. The stability of hierarchy of
choices within a culture gives us an insight of the underlying values of that
stability. In reality that the actors
are continuously redefining stability involved.
Humanity is pliable, as culture molds personality and fashions order and
form from the lives of a people that is unique with a historical and cultural
setting. Human needs and basic human
nature are socially fabricated or transformed; human nature is also at its core
universal. Because humans are an
interactive components nature, and through nature and cultures humans are
adapting and interacting with specific natural environments human survive in
most known terrestrial environments.
Because of this adaptation people through cultural activities change
their environment causing people to readapt to those changes in that
environment (Donham: 54-55).
Human
unity with nature exists through industry.
Social science must reflect this if it is to understand the deeper
underlying connections between specific social actions and global trends. In this Industry, commerce, production, and
exchange establish distribution, which in turn give birth to ideological
possibilities. Along theses lines
social-economic classes are determined by the mode of production. The needs of every class society creates its
own ideological support, with bourgeois society science develops to meet the
needs of its mode of production. This is
possible because the ruling ideas of any class society are that of the ruling
class. Those who control the material
forces of society, rule also in the ideas of that society. Workers are subject to those ideas. The dominant ideology reflects the dominant
material relations (Marx 1947: 62 -65).
People make individual choices; particular choices
with a view toward attain certain ends.
These ends vary within and between cultures as historical situations
evolve and change. The stability of
hierarchy of choices within a culture gives us an insight of the underlying
values of that stability. In reality
that the actors are continuously redefining stability involved. Humanity is pliable, as culture molds
personality and fashions order and form from the lives of a people that is
unique with a historical and cultural setting.
Human needs and basic human nature are socially fabricated or
transformed; human nature is also at its core universal. Because humans are an interactive components
nature, and through nature and their cultures humans are adapting and
interacting with specific natural environments humans survive as a
species. Because of this adaptation
people through cultural activities change their environment causing people to
readapt to those changes in that environment (Donham: 54-55).
This is the beginning of a historical
anthropology. Humans in fact create themselves and their society through their
productive action which we call labor, in the material world of nature. Productive powers are the resources including
their ability to labor, which people use in that process. It is acting people using symbols, ideas and
objects that change nature which is the historical core to the very production
of society and its culture (Donham: 60). We produce, make happen, alter, create
and ultimately bring forth ourselves through labor. Thought and action through labor produces new
thought and action continuously. Culture
through communication, and collective expressive validity, which creates
meaning, that becomes basic to the cultural explanations and socially
knowledgeable people who in turn produce themselves by creating culture
(Donham: 57).
Productive powers are anything that can be used in
production, through production people interacts with nature. People in a way that production in fact
occurs because it is used can use these forces and powers. This contribution to production is in fact planned. There must be an objective knowledge about
this contribution to production. This
interpretive composition of comprehension is within a culturally defined
meaning within a relative context. A
related interactive complex of meaning for the actors is involved. This is central to the interpretation of
symbols needed to carry out production.
Productive powers include raw materials, technology, within an
environment along with the skills and knowledge about the use of technology
with in that environment. (Donham: 59).
Societies
to a certain degree are internally consistent.
There is a fundamental interactive relationship between economy,
politics and religion in a mutually reciprocal way where these institutions can
be intellectually defined within a larger social whole. These “social totalities” have structures of
somewhat consistent arrangements of institutions that define the type of
character a society has, in spite of the variation with in the whole of that
society. In any social and historical
setting there are limited options that the formation of these structures place
upon choices people make and the degree of social change possible. There are types of societies these types form
epochs. The epochs are a short hand for
these basic themes of production of human social life of an entire historical
era. (Donham: 58).
Humans
in fact create themselves and their society through their productive action in
the material world. Productive powers
are the resources that people use in that process. It is acting people using symbols, ideas and
objects that change nature is the core to the production of society and its
culture (Donham: 60). All human social relations and their functions have an
incontestable influence upon material production, and material production
directly influences these relations (Donham: 60).
Humans need to realize
themselves through labor. Through labor
people develop power and skills with dialectic with nature. Productive knowledge is central to this
actualization. Differing productive
powers (forces of production) express themselves in different societies. Different relations of production give
internal groups different interests in technological changes in these different
societies. Most social revolutions would
appear to preserve the level of productive powers already achieved. Yet this tendency of expanding powers can
best be seen at the world level, because locally relations of production can
prevent technical development beyond a certain point. The population size and average productivity
of labor is resolutely conditions mass productive powers (Donham: 61).
It is power that decides differing groups access to
control over the means of production, and the division of the fruits of labor
of that society. Relations of
production lead to productive inequalities.
These relations of production are affinity between groups with in a
society in which some groups dominate and others remain subordinate in
production and distribution. This is the
bases the either a political sociology or an economic anthropology.
The novel and the film Quo Vadiis
(1951) about the early Christians is a story of oppression and protest. This
story seems current with the actions of the new Pope. The following is
dedicated to Pope Francis and was inspired by the film Quo Vadiis.
Marx’s famous opium of
the people quote is really about the expression of a people who are suffering
in powerlessness against forces beyond their command. What was needed is more
control over the things that happen to us that brings about that suffering. The
goal is to expand real democracy to all aspects of life. Marx‘s claimed was
that religion would be necessary until that suffering could deal in real and
material terms. (Marx)
Engels would further
claim that in the beginning Christianity had many elements of a genuine protest
movement. It was an expression of an oppressed people. Like socialism of the time of Engels, the
appeal was to the bottom rungs of society talking about the approaching
salvation. The chains of repression and suffering would be burst asunder. Where
the Christian look to the next life for justice, the socialist looked forward
to the approaching revolution in this life to make things right. In the early
days of both movements the authorities had cracked down hard on followers. Just
like the red scares that periodically plagued American history Christianity
made an easy target for Roman authorities. But, in both cases the persecution
only created martyrs for the cause. (Engels)
Christianity began in
protest. But, it grew first in an area of protest. The Jewish revolt and the
destruction of the temple was the real origin of the spread of Christianity.
Jew vs. Jew, after the destruction
of the temple, only the Pharisee and Christian Jew remained, of the main
competing factions of Judaism. The Pharisee is the Rabbinical Judaism and as
God’s chosen they are the keeper of the law. Like most tribal people, who are
all God's chosen, they must remain separated from the other. (Myers)
Early Christians’ main goals were to
build communities of resistance to oppression. The Christians rejected armed
struggle. Romans would exterminate Zealots committed to armed struggle. The
Christians rejected the withdrawing from the Roman world like the Essen who the
Romans hunted down. The church in
Palestine was rural based and very much in the Jewish tradition. (Kautsky)
Paul re-established a modified
version of the law less rigorous. This version of Christianity was still Jewish
but designed for urban Rome, and also would open its doors to Greeks and Romans.
The Rabbis criticism of the Christians was similar to their criticism of the
Samaritans. Both were weak in following of the law therefore unclean. The
Christians criticism of the Pharisees was they were legalistic and too
intellectual. Soon Christianity spread to the non-Jew (Kautsky)
Christian Eschatological was central
to their theology. This includes the replacement of this evil world with a holy
world. To the Rabbinical Jew the next life remains unknown, and we are to focus
on living the law and how to be the best person we can in this life. God will
take care of us after we die. Both can lead to a secular movement of Socialism,
yet the revolutionary socialist share more in common with the Christian.
(Aptheker)
While in the past much
what we call organized religion have been a major ideological support for
established relationships of power. At times in history religious imagery has
been used in protest movements against those relationships of power. After three
hundred years Christianity became the official religion of Rome and a source of
oppression. Thus behind these confrontations were competing classes. (Engels)
The simple message equality
still lies deep within the teachings of the Church. The same teachings used to
justify power have been the source of inspiration for rebellion. From the early
Middle Ages through the early modern period in Europe discontent with wealth,
power and corruption borrowed from Christianity to express itself. An example
can be found in the liberation theology of Latin America of the late 1960’s on.
In Latin America Christianity and
Marxism (with a healthy dash of left anarchism) can be easily synthesized. Even
though many Marxist and Anarchist reject God, their tradition was an outgrowth
of Eschatological Christianity. To both Marxist and Liberation Christian their
focus is on the poor. To the radical Christian God loves the poor more than the
rich, because the poor are more in need of God’s love. Marxism tries to become
the voice of the poor. To the Marxist our duty is to struggle for political and
economic equality. To the radical Christian poverty is an abomination to God.
The cause of poverty is wealth; therefore to become overly wealthy is sin. (Gutierrez)
Liberation theology rightly condemns a
tradition that attempts to use God for its own ends but wrongly denies God's
definitive self-disclosure in biblical revelation. To argue that our conception
of God is determined by the historical situation is to agree with radical
secularity in absolutizing the temporal process, making it difficult to
distinguish between theology and ideology.
According to Gutierrez Marxism may
be a useful tool in identifying the class struggle that is being waged in many
Third World countries, but the question arises whether the role of Marxism is
limited to a tool of analysis or whether it has become a political solution.
Liberation theology rightly exposes the fact of oppression in society and the
fact that there are oppressors and oppressed, but it is wrong to give this
alignment an almost ontological status. This may be true in Marxism, but the
Christian understands sin and alienation from God as a dilemma confronting both
the oppressor and the oppressed. Liberation theology's emphasis upon the poor
gives the impression that the poor are not only the object of God's concern but
the salvific (having
the power to redeem) and revelatory (relating to revelation)
subject. Only the cry of the oppressed is the voice of God. Everything else is
projected as a vain attempt to comprehend God by some self-serving means. This
is a confused and misleading notion. Biblical theology reveals that God is for
the poor, but it does not teach that the poor are the actual embodiment of God
in today's world. Liberation theology threatens to politicize the gospel to the
point that the poor are offered a solution that could be provided with or
without Jesus Christ. (Gutierrez)
Liberation theology stirs Christians
to take seriously the social and political impact of Jesus' life and death but does
not ground Jesus' uniqueness in the reality of his deity. It claims he is
different from us by degree, not by kind, and that his cross is the climax of
his vicarious identification with suffering of mankind rather than a
substitutionary death offered on our behalf to turn away the wrath of God and
triumph over sin, death, and the devil. (Gutierrez)
The foundation of
Marxism is humanism. Early Marx’s writings were well within the tradition of
secular humanism. Later in his lifetime his study of political economy the
humanist root remained. Liberation theology can and will borrow from Marxist
sociology, but remains Christian to its core. The Marxist can find a friend and
ally in the Radical Christian, as long as the Marxist realized as a secular
humanist she and her Christian friends would never share the same worldview.
Bibliography
Aptheker, Hebert (1968)
Marxism and Religion in Marxism and Christianity Ed. By Hebert Aptheker: New
York Humanities Press
Frederick Engels 1894
On the
History of Early Christianity
First Published: In Die Neue Zeit, 1894-95
Gutierrez, Gustavo (1988) A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation,
Mayknoll, New York; Orbs Press
Karl Kautsky Foundations of Christianity (1908)
Taken from Marxists
Archives
http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1908/christ/index.htm
Works of Karl Marx 1843
Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right
Introduction (1844)
Cambridge
University Press, 1970 Ed. Joseph O’Malley;
Myers, Ched (2003)
Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus,
Maryknoll, New York: Orbs Books
No comments:
Post a Comment