An analysis of the Marxist Perspective on Religion
An analysis of the Marxist Perspective on Religion
Aaron Trebble
Introduction
Marx, Karl Heinrich (1818-1883) was born in Trier, his family was Jewish, but later converted to Protestantism (belonging to a church other than that of Roman Catholic denomination) in 1824 in order to avoid anti-Semitic laws and persecution. For this reason among others, Marx rejected religion early on in his youth and made it absolutely clear that he was an atheist. Marx studied philosophy at Bonn and then later Berlin, where he came under the sway of George Wilhelm Friedrich von Hegel. This is significant, as one of Marx's key works is a response to his ideas.
In 1842, Marx became editor of the Cologne anti status - quo newspaper 'Rheinische Zeitung' criticizing contemporary political and social conditions. Journalism was to become a large part of Marx's life, and he used it to express many of his philosophies. It was working at this paper that Marx met Friedrich Engels, which is significant, as this is a man who had a large influence on him, and also provided financial support in order to distribute his ideas. It was with Engels that Marx laid down some of his main political ideas in the 'Manifesto of the Communist Party.' This is a significant publication, in which we gain a very good amount of background information on Marx's ideas for an equal economy.
The ideas presented in the paper involved him in controversy with the authorities and in 1843, Marx was compelled to resign his editorial post, and soon afterwards, the 'Rheinische Zeitung' was forced to discontinue publication. Marx then went to Paris; there as a result of his further studies in philosophy, history and political science, he adopted communist beliefs. Marx was exposed to the writings by critiques of religion such as Feuerbach and Bauer. In their writings they characterized religion as a 'form of alienation' and their work did have a decisive impact on Marx in his development of thought. Feuerbach said:
'God is to be understood as the essence of the human species, externalised and projected into an alien reality... What we believe of God is really true of our selves'.
The essence of God is thus nothing but the projected essence of man, who is the true God. This would have played a vital role in forming Marx's ideas on religion being an unnecessary shield to reality, which simply prevents the Proletariat from finding out the true intentions of the Bourgeoisie.
Background on ideology
Of all the areas Marx wrote on, his comments on religion are by far the shortest, as they are very blunt and to the point. He states that religion plays a crucial role in maintaining the social class inequality present in capitalism, and so in order to best understand his critique of religion, it is necessary to first look at his theories of economics.
The Bourgeoisie (the upper class) control the Proletariat through the inequality they create in capitalism. As it is in the best interests of the Bourgeoisie to continue to hold the majority of the capital, they must try all methods possible to legitimate and reproduce class inequality. The status quo is enforced and given justification through the use of the education system, the mass media and through religion.
Religion as 'the opium of the people.'
The ideas of Marx are undeniably unconventional in terms of how the sociology of religion is traditionally presented, but they are also much more complex than is usually realised. The most commonly quoted passage is shown below, and is taken from Marx's contribution to 'A Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Law.'
'Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people.' (1)
This statement is often largely misinterpreted, with focus being on the claim that, 'it is the opium of the people.' This statement alone seems to show a scything critique of religion and the people who follow it, but the context in which this opiate is required shows that Marx felt some compassion for the people. He states that religion is a necessary reaction to the 'spiritless situation' they have been placed in. Religion plays the role of helping to make the alienation of the proletariat more acceptable. Akin to the treatment of a sporting injury, which is a ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
This statement is often largely misinterpreted, with focus being on the claim that, 'it is the opium of the people.' This statement alone seems to show a scything critique of religion and the people who follow it, but the context in which this opiate is required shows that Marx felt some compassion for the people. He states that religion is a necessary reaction to the 'spiritless situation' they have been placed in. Religion plays the role of helping to make the alienation of the proletariat more acceptable. Akin to the treatment of a sporting injury, which is a common metaphor for conveying this idea, the opium helps people to avoid having to face what is going on until it is over. In this situation, religion is turned to with the hope that 'real distress' will be eliminated, and that somehow, faith in God will make this process quicker.
The statement below shows that Marx views religion as simply a natural outcome of mans surroundings and circumstances, and is developed to fulfil material needs. Marx does not believe that God actually exists outside of our own thoughts; all of our gods are our own creations, made to suit the need of a particular society.
'Man makes religion, religion does not make man' (2)
Marx would say that even within the Bible, the figure of God or Jesus changes according to the need of the writers. Some writers were writing for gentiles to encourage them to convert to Christianity, while others were writing their works for Jewish people informing them of the coming judgement day.
Marx did not disapprove of the Proletariat and their reaction. Certainly, he was blighted by poverty for much of his life, and religion is not seen as the main problem in society, just a contributor to the replication and justification of class inequality. At the time of writing his ideas, Marx saw great injustice in the treatment of the working class to benefit only a small few at the top of the capitalist system. He believed that the economic state of the country was what had caused a great dependency on religion at this time. Religion only presents ideas, ideas cannot do further damage to the real problem, which is the unjust treatment of the Proletariat by the Bourgeoisie.
The problem Marx did see with religion, however, was that, as with an opiate on a sporting injury, it was not fixing the problem. He believed religion simply lulls it's followers into a false sense of class security, with the belief that inequality need not be dealt with, as divine intervention would eventually justify suffering. It also annoyed Marx that the opiate to inequality was being administered by the ruling class, the very cause of the pain.
The statement which followed the above quote is shown below:
'The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions.' (3)
This refers to how Marx felt the problem should be solved. He believed that religion would have to be, over the course of time, removed, so that people could look up and see the reality of their situation. When the distinction between reality and essence disappeared then the essence would no longer be required. Then something could be done about the situation of the Proletariat. The main concept behind much of Marx's philosophies is shown here. He believed that humanity should strive for, and was naturally heading towards, the abolition of social class and inequality (communism). In his utopian society, there is nothing to hide from, and thus, no need for religion.
Religion as the 'premise of all criticism.'
In his contribution to 'A Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right,' Marx states:
'For Germany, the criticism of religion is in the main complete, and criticism of religion is the premise of all criticism.' (4)
The first section of this statement shows how Marx believed that society was inevitably heading towards the point where rejection of religion would occur. The second point made, referring to religion as 'the premise of all criticism,' refers to religion's effect on the alienation which derived from man's material possessions. That is to say, given the position of religion in society, where it is sanctioning inequality with the promise of later solutions, it is necessary to look at a possible effect of man's continued alienation through inequality.
John Macmurray, a Marxist, claimed that the our interpretation of what Marx meant by criticism is crucial here as well. He said that Marx did not mean 'the blank denial of religion...Marx meant that the understanding of religion was the key to the understanding of social history.' (5) This suggests that Marx meant that through identifying the need for religion, we can see how to eradicate it.
It does seem that the interpretation of this statement is important. Calling religion the 'premise of all criticism' could imply that it is a critical model in the legitimating of society by the bourgeoisie, and by looking at the weaknesses of religion we could see the weaknesses of all society. However, Marx was not in favour of the active suppression of religion, so perhaps he was implying that religion can reveal the state of man, and then, the acceptance of this would result in the removal of inequality and alienation.
Marx as an Atheist
Atheism refers to :
a) Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
Or
b) The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
In discussing this concept, Marx said :
'Atheism, as a denial of this unreality, is no longer meaningful, for atheism is a negation of God and seeks to assert by this negation the existence of man. Socialism no longer requires such a roundabout method, it begins from the theoretical and practical sense perception of man and nature as essential beings, it is positive human self - consciousness, no longer a self-consciousness attained through the negation of religion.' (6)
The first thing that becomes clear from this statement, is that Marx is as against atheism as he is religion. This is likely to be due to atheism being a religious term, which is drawn from the said, 'unreality.' Thus, to deny religion in this sense would miss the point Marx is trying to make.
Furthermore, the idea of God, as we have already seen, represents the spirit and ideal representations of the Proletariat. Thus, to deny God would deny all chances of progress from the Proletariat. The essence of man will be required if class inequality is ever to be removed. Lauer summed this up well:
'It is not God but the belief in God which must go, if man is to be free.' (7)
It is more important then, to remove the circumstances where the affirmation or denial of God is an issue. Marx claimed that 'socialism no longer requires' such a thing, again showing that religion is simply a response to a situation, and when the situation is removed, religion will lose it's place.
There are similarities in Marx's theory of religion to that of Sigmund Freud, who also thought that religion presents a false need for personal security, and was perfectly happy to predict the removal of religion, along with the situation when it is necessary.
Critique and evaluation
It is an undeniable truth that Marx's ideas of religion have had great influence in the last century, as they are part of a philosophy of political action, and not just a remote theory. Communism until recently was the leading political theory in over a third of the world's countries; This included superpowers such as China and The Soviet Union as well as many smaller nations. For these people, the Marxist theories of religion would be all they knew. Forty years ago, Marxist intellectuals were certain of victory over capitalism. However, in the last decade communism has gone almost total collapse, with a vast reduction in the number of countries following it. This, predictably has meant that Marxist theory is, at the moment at least, standing in universal discredit.
Perhaps one of the most serious criticisms of Marx's ideas is shown by what happened in The Soviet Union, when Lenin led a small party of professional revolutionaries, the Bolsheviks, to try and put them into practice, by taking power after the Tsar was overthrown. To achieve the transition from capitalism to socialism and finally communism, Lenin used Marx's theory of "Dictatorship of the Proletariat". The most politically advanced section of the Proletariat would form the communist party and lead the rest of the country forward. Since the Bolsheviks totally represented the people, all other political parties were abolished. The party: tolerated no opposition, owned all industry and property, had a powerful secret police, kept strict control over all levels of education and barred all liberal literature and art from entering Russia; not unlike the regime that the Tsars ruled by. What became apparent after a few years was that power stemmed from the top, just like under the Tsars. For the average Russian the repression continued. After Lenin's death in the late 1920's, Josef Stalin took control of Russia. It was under Stalin's command that the terrible political purges in the 1930's took place. A famous quote of Stalin shows just how heavily he was influenced:
'Religion is a kind of spiritual gin in which the slaves of capital drown their human shape and their claims to any decent life.' (8)
The similarities between this and Marx's thoughts printed in the 'Manifesto of the Communist Party' are undeniable, as are then, the influence of Marx on communist Russia. Until his death in 1953, this dictator showed what Marxism-Leninism could mean in practice, which is vastly different than in theory.
In support of the belief that religion is acting as an ineffective opiate, seems to be the wealth of the Roman Catholic church. Surely, these funds could be applied to something more relevant, such as helping those in poverty. Also, the RC church has very stringent policies on contraception, abortion, women priests and homosexuality. This could be presented as evidence for religion controlling and supporting the status quo.
The sociologist Halevy (9) claims that Methodist movements in the 19th century distracted workers from their class grievances and encouraged them to see enlightenment. This shows support for Marxist ideas, in that without religion distracting them, the workers could have revolted against inequality.
Most probably influenced by Hegel, who thought it was the most important of all religions (10), Marx's critique only covers Christianity. This means that his critique, can at best, only cover monotheistic (single God) religions. This means that, even if his theory did ring true for western religions, it could be very difficult to apply it to the predominantly polytheistic (multiple God) eastern religions.
Rather interestingly, as shown by Daniel Pals, the primitive religions of ancient Greece and Rome portrayed the hope of an afterlife only for the rich and powerful (11). This weakens Marx's view that religion serves to prevent the revolution of proletarians by promising them reward in heaven. However, it could be argued that these religions still justified the social class inequalities, by showing that the gods looked highly upon the bourgeoisie.
In terms of their relevance today, one only has to look to the degree to which secularisation has occurred in the world. The ideological power of religion is undermined, given that it only reaches the 10% of the world's population who attend.(12)
There have been examples in history, of religious movements bringing about radical social change for the better. For example, Reverend Martin Luther King and the Southern Baptists played a vital role in the elimination of the segregation of black people in 1960's America. Also, somewhat ironically, Liberation theology, a combination of Christian and Marxist ideas, has caused people in Central America to actively seek political equality in society. (13)
Marx believed that when communism defeated capitalist inequality, there would no longer be the need for religion. However, the people of many basic tribal colonies have strong faith in a religion, despite the fact that they have no capitalistic stresses to concern them. Whether this could be the case for the developed world with the advent of total communism, it still is a very interesting point.
Conclusion
In concluding, the ideas of Karl Heinrich Marx stated that religion is one of the various ideological apparatus used by the working class in order to reproduce and legitimate the inequalities of the class system. His ideas on religion were reductionist; He believed it serves to produce a fatalistic following, who do not intend to do anything about their situation, instead choosing to wait on divine intervention. Religion is not the key to the problem, just part of it. Marx's views were very critical of religion, although he sympathised with the proletariat and how they could be led to hold faith, because he himself was blighted by poverty.
There are several flaws to Marx's theories, mainly in how it appears when put into practice, but also in the way that some of the ideas presented hold little or no relevance today. Also, it is greatly weakened by the fact that it can only be applied to western religions. As Marx wrote so little solely on religion, it would be very difficult to draw conclusions without reference to his overall theories of economics, which are weakened by the fact that, in the last decade, capitalism has regained almost complete domination of the world's political powers.
Endnotes :
(1) - Pals 1996 Pg, 141.
(2) - Pals 1996 Pg. 140.
(3) - Pals 1996 Pg. 141.
(4) - Marx 1843 (introduction)
(5) - Kessel 1984 Pg. 1
(6) - Kessel 1984 Pg. 2
(7) - Kessel 1984 Pg. 2
(8) - http://www.revision-notes.co.uk/revision/158.html
(9) - Chapman 2000 Pg. 95
(10) - Cline Pg. 3
(11) - Pals 1996 Pg. 147
(12) - Chapman 2000 Pg. 96
(13) - Chapman 2000 Pg. 96
Bibliography :
Seven Theories of Religion - Daniel L. Pals (Oxford University Press - 1996)
Revise AS Sociology - Steve Chapman (Letts Educational Limited - 2000)
A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right - Karl Marx - 1843
The Communist Manifesto - Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (Moscow Foreign Language Publishing House - 1955)
(http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm)
Marx, Religion and Sociology of Religion - David H. Kessel - 1984
(http://www.angelfire.com/or/sociologyshop/msor.html)
Karl Marx, Religion and Economics - Austin Cline
(http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_marx_religion.htm, http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_marx_opium.htm, http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_marx_problems.htm)
Religion According To Marx (UK Learning 2001-2003)
(http://www.revision-notes.co.uk/revision/158.html)
