Marx and a Christian Critique of Capitalism

As promised, here is my paper on Marx and Christianity. The prompt for the paper told us to limit it to 1,000 words. Mine ended up somewhere around 1,300. Due to space I didn't get a chance to say everything I wanted to, but the paper was overdue, so I figure I should just call it done. However, that said, I'm still happy with how it turned out. Consider it a brief introduction to my thoughts on Marxism.

You'll notice that all of my quotations come from one volume of essays and the manifesto (except the first one, so feel free to not click any of the numbers beyond the first endnote). Perhaps my opinion will change as I continue to read Marx, but as of now I feel familiar enough to make these basic assertions (I received a high A, so apparently my professor thinks it's good.). Hopefully I've done justice to the subject matter. It has just been graded, and I took some suggestions into account.

Marx and a Christian Critique of Capitalism

            In America, Karl Marx has been demonized quite heavily throughout the last century. Many of his critics, especially today, come from the politically conservative “Christian” right. The terms “communism” and “socialism” have been equated with oppression and dictatorships and have served as buzz words to point out the enemies of freedom, famously by Joseph McCarthy and more recently by Glenn Beck. As a clear proponent of communism and one who is often seen as its figurehead, Marx has also been equated with the aforementioned things. In this essay, I will attempt to show a more appropriate relationship between Marx and Christianity by highlighting a few areas of alliance.[1]

            Despite his staunch atheism, Marx has several things to offer a Christian critique of capitalist society. Capitalism has been understood as a Christian system of economics for two centuries. It is often held up as something encouraging hard work and earning what one has (Max Weber’s Protestant Work Ethic comes to mind) as opposed to lazily going about life. It is also hailed as a harbinger of freedom, especially in America. Although Marx points out several issues and consequences regarding the reigning system, this paper will focus primarily on class struggle and materialism.

            In Manifesto of the Communist Party by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, the authors explain the opposition between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. They state “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.”[2] They describe the bourgeoisie as an unchecked juggernaut able to subjugate any and all under its thumb; something that respects neither tradition nor humanity. “The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honored and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science into its paid wage laborers.”[3] This class, a collection of capitalists (those owning the means of production, or “capital”), seeks only one goal as capitalists: increased capital. This it accomplishes independent of a concern for humanity. Indeed, to make the truly greatest profit one must separate oneself from humanity and morality. The bourgeoisie existing in the minority, however, requires the proletariat to provide its labor as a means of production.
The proletariat exists to serve the bourgeoisie. Engels and Marx describe the class as:

“a class of laborers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labor increases capital. These laborers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce, and are consequently exposed to all the vicissitudes of competition, to all fluctuations of the market.”[4]

In capitalism, men are treated like property – traded, bought, sold. The proletarian must work hard and sell his labor to secure a wage determined by the bourgeois employer and thus relies solely on the bourgeoisie. This wage is then used to purchase goods – an action which supports the bourgeoisie by providing it money. In this way, the bourgeoisie has subjugated a whole section of humanity – all that is other to it – in order to sustain itself (both as a class and as a way of life).

            What Marx has in mind is the liberation and humanization of the worker. In an essay called “Wages of Labor,” Marx describes the state of the relationship between the worker and the capitalist in the context of wages. The worker relies heavily on the capitalist and the capitalist on the worker. However, as Marx clearly points out, “the worker need not necessarily gain when the capitalist does, but he necessarily loses when the latter does.”[5] Furthermore, the worker is commodified and used by the capitalist as such. This is large-scale dehumanization. Human beings are reduced to objects to be used for nothing but increasing capital. As Marx points out, in a wage-based system, the worker becomes subject to the laws of supply and demand – a demand depending entirely on the “whim of the rich and the capitalists.”[6] This leads to competition among the workers. If the surplus of workers exceeds the demand for workers, the surplus must die out. “The demand for men necessarily governs the production of men, as of every other commodity.”[7] Though many Christian capitalists deny that capitalists are inhuman enough to forget about the worker, this has been exemplified in history, notably in the public mind in the Industrial Revolution in Europe (the context of Marx) and more familiarly the early 1900s in America (excellently illustrated by novels like Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle), though it has happened every day for the last two hundred years.

            Marx often explains the negative effects of capitalism on society. “The only wheels which political economy sets in motion are avarice and war among the avarice – competition.”[8] Is competition what humanity was ideally created for? The Biblical narrative promotes cooperation and brotherhood, not separation and rivalry. And does not the capitalist system praise and require competition? Furthermore, Marx describes the silliness of money and its powers to nullify the natural and make things absurd. Money affords power, despite any natural limitations. “I am bad, dishonest, unscrupulous, stupid; but money is honored, and therefore so is its possessor. Money is the supreme good, therefore its possessor is good.”[9] Capital makes absurd things equal – equal costs create equal things (groceries and apparel, workers and machines, etc. – as far as the market is concerned, these are the same items).

            Marx has a lot to offer Christianity, particularly the modern American manifestation of it. Marx highlights over and over that humanity’s relationships are material. I do not think this is incongruent with the Biblical narrative. Too often American Christianity finds itself wrapped up completely in a transcendent reality apart from where we live. Jesus Christ was heavily interested in the material relationships of humanity, particularly the poor. Even Christ’s own mother delivers a famous passage regarding God’s exalting of the lower class and sending the rich away empty-handed (Luke 1:46-55). Repeatedly we find Scripture identifying with the poor and lowly and advocating equality and classless society. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28). In terms of communism itself, a lot of parallels can be drawn directly from social practices in both the Old and New Testament. In Leviticus 25:35-37, God commands the Israelites to take care of the poor man and sustain him and warns against imposing usurious interest. Likewise Acts 2:42-47 and 4:32-35 describe the early church living communally and taking care of one another sharing material possessions and teaching. The early church was not interested in capitalism by any means. The early church was interested in taking care of people in this world having been inspired by the Harbinger of the next. Capitalism is necessarily selfish, aiming to fulfill the wants of those on the top of society. Christianity is necessarily selfless, aiming to fulfill the needs of those on the bottom.

            Much of Christianity is often concerned primarily with theoretical theology and not material needs. Marx has taken the responsibility of opposing the currently accepted economic system in a scientific and rational way. Instead of denying his usefulness because of the failure and perversion of his intellectual heirs, Christians ought to embrace his often correct analysis of the oppression and injustices inherent in the system – injustices that do not promote a Scriptural understanding of sacrifice and cooperation but instead promote selfish gain and competition. We owe a debt to Marx for showing us where Christ is needed. It seems incongruent to say that a homeless man who was followed around by a group of working-class disciples and spent most of his time living with and healing the underbelly of Rome would promote capitalism as we know it. What sort of Christianity endorses exploitation?

[1] Much could be said about Marxism and Christianity necessarily diverging, but I have decided to forego that for the sake of length.
[2] Frederick Engels and Karl Marx. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 Karl Marx and the Communist Manifesto. Prometheus Books: Amherst, New York. 1988. 209.
[3] Engels and Marx. Manifesto. 212.
[4] Ibid. 216.
[5] Karl Marx. “Wages of Labor” in Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Prometheus Books: Amherst, New York. 1988. 21.
[6] Karl Marx. “Wages of Labor” in Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Prometheus Books: Amherst, New York. 1988. 20.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Karl Marx. “Estranged Labor” in Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Prometheus Books: Amherst, New York. 1988. 70.
[9] Karl Marx. “The Power of Money in Bourgeois Society” in Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Prometheus Books: Amherst, New York. 1988. 138.