Question about Marxist Analysis of Class Consciousness

[barnhart]

... Not that I am, or was, in favor of a socialist revolution, but in light of the question "Why did Marxist Communism have to be anti-Christian?", it has long seemed to me that the answer lies in their similarities. Boht belief systems (in pure form) endeavor to bring about equality. But the secular version had to defeat Christianity, because the State needed to be at the center, and could not share it with God. (I will also openly admit that I sometimes found myself "on the same side" as our Marxist "enemies" - people who opposed our main purpose to their very core..


.. Rather, each power structure is grappling against the other in order to gain the top position, to be "The King of the Hill".

I suspect communism took a sharper stance against Christianity than "necessary" because the church structure it was familiar with was in bed with exploitative power.

The former pastor of our church was church planting in Nicaragua during the revolution. At one point he and several men from the church were detained in a leftist rebel camp deep in the jungle. They were being treated roughly until the commander returned who immediately ordered their release. They overheard him tell his soldiers, "These men are not your enemies. I know who they are. They taught the men in my parents village to read and took them to the capital to register their land."

[Ken]

... Not that I am, or was, in favor of a socialist revolution, but in light of the question "Why did Marxist Communism have to be anti-Christian?", it has long seemed to me that the answer lies in their similarities. Boht belief systems (in pure form) endeavor to bring about equality. But the secular version had to defeat Christianity, because the State needed to be at the center, and could not share it with God. (I will also openly admit that I sometimes found myself "on the same side" as our Marxist "enemies" - people who opposed our main purpose to their very core..


.. Rather, each power structure is grappling against the other in order to gain the top position, to be "The King of the Hill".

I suspect communism took a sharper stance against Christianity than "necessary" because the church structure it was familiar with was in bed with exploitative power.

The former pastor of our church was church planting in Nicaragua during the revolution. At one point he and several men from the church were detained in a leftist rebel camp deep in the jungle. They were being treated roughly until the commander returned who immediately ordered their release. They overheard him tell his soldiers, "These men are not your enemies. I know who they are. They taught the men in my parents village to read and took them to the capital to register their land."

Communism in the time of Marx in the 1840 and latter half of the 19th Century was largely a European phenomenon and in most European countries, especially the German, Austro-Hungarian, and Russian empires, the Church and state were essentially one. The institutional churches provided the support and authority to the monarchs that Marxists were trying to overturn.

I suspect he was talking more about the Catholic and Orthodox hierarchies rather than rural Anabaptists. In every European monarchy and in every Latin American country, the institutional church was deeply conservative and deeply opposed to all social reforms.

[PetrChelcicky]

But Marx' idea that religion was the opium (narcotics) of the people would apply to Anabaptism as well.

[Ken]

But Marx' idea that religion was the opium (narcotics) of the people would apply to Anabaptism as well.

Well, it would apply to any religion, not just Christianity.

But what percentage of the Western European population in the 1840s was Anabaptist? 0.1%? 0.01%?

Marx was writing primarily for a Western European audience and expecting his Communist revolution to arise out of industrial capitalism of the sort present in countries like Germany, Britain and the United States. His writings don't really anticipate the peasant revolutions that came later in Russia and China. The Russian Revolution occurred 35 years after his death.

[Neto]

But Marx' idea that religion was the opium (narcotics) of the people would apply to Anabaptism as well.

Well, it would apply to any religion, not just Christianity.

But what percentage of the Western European population in the 1840s was Anabaptist? 0.1%? 0.01%?

Marx was writing primarily for a Western European audience and expecting his Communist revolution to arise out of industrial capitalism of the sort present in countries like Germany, Britain and the United States. His writings don't really anticipate the peasant revolutions that came later in Russia and China. The Russian Revolution occurred 35 years after his death.

The revolution in Russia didn't just suddenly happen in 1917. Political unrest & attempts had been made on the Czar's life by already around 1860.

[Ken]

But Marx' idea that religion was the opium (narcotics) of the people would apply to Anabaptism as well.

Well, it would apply to any religion, not just Christianity.

But what percentage of the Western European population in the 1840s was Anabaptist? 0.1%? 0.01%?

Marx was writing primarily for a Western European audience and expecting his Communist revolution to arise out of industrial capitalism of the sort present in countries like Germany, Britain and the United States. His writings don't really anticipate the peasant revolutions that came later in Russia and China. The Russian Revolution occurred 35 years after his death.

The revolution in Russia didn't just suddenly happen in 1917. Political unrest & attempts had been made on the Czar's life by already around 1860.

Yes, but Marx didn't think Russia was ready for communism because it was a feudal society and had not yet passed through industrialization. Essentially he thought that industrial workers would achieve "class consciousness" and lead the revolution, not rural peasants. Who he viewed as sedated by religion and tradition, etc. In the 1840s the Orthodox church was all powerful in rural Russia compared to more industrialized places like London or Berlin where the church was losing its sway. I think this is what Marx was talking about with the "opiate of the people" business. And part of the reason why he expected communist revolution to arise first in western countries like Germany and Britain and not Russia.

Where I think Marx went wrong is that he underestimated the productive power of industrialization. When he wrote the Communist Manifesto in the 1840s industrial workers were lucky to have a one-room tenement, three meals a day, and a spare set of clothes. He didn't conceive that modern workers could own cars, TVs, iPhones, bass boats, big houses, fatten themselves on an excess of calories, and have too many clothes to fit in their closets. Or that their children would receive a free public education and the ability to rise above their class station.

[Neto]

... Marx didn't think Russia was ready for communism because it was a feudal society and had not yet passed through industrialization. Essentially he thought that industrial workers would achieve "class consciousness" and lead the revolution, not rural peasants. Who he viewed as sedated by religion and tradition, etc. In the 1840s the Orthodox church was all powerful in rural Russia compared to more industrialized places like London or Berlin where the church was losing its sway. I think this is what Marx was talking about with the "opiate of the people" business. And part of the reason why he expected communist revolution to arise first in western countries like Germany and Britain and not Russia.

Where I think Marx went wrong is that he underestimated the productive power of industrialization. When he wrote the Communist Manifesto in the 1840s industrial workers were lucky to have a one-room tenement, three meals a day, and a spare set of clothes. He didn't conceive that modern workers could own cars, TVs, iPhones, bass boats, big houses, fatten themselves on an excess of calories, and have too many clothes to fit in their closets. Or that their children would receive a free public education and the ability to rise above their class station.

In light of your comments here, it is interesting to note the extent to which anarchism (of Machno at least) went over well in the peasant villages, and seemingly was actually viable in the setting of former surfs, while it utterly failed to gain traction in the industrial areas. [I do not know for sure, but I suspect class consciousness played into this, because I would suspect that the down-trodden factory workers were not from the population of the recently freed surfs. ('Recently' in terms of about 2 generations, or roughly 55 years.) I also wish I knew more about how it functioned in respect to the industrial operations in the Mennonite colonies. Perhaps they never got that far, since they were also fighting the Reds and the Whites. But it is not possible to know how long his new society might have lasted, if it were not for that outside opposition. The final destruction of the colony life came later, at the hands of the Reds, more so during the reign of Joseph Stalin.]

[Ken]

... Marx didn't think Russia was ready for communism because it was a feudal society and had not yet passed through industrialization. Essentially he thought that industrial workers would achieve "class consciousness" and lead the revolution, not rural peasants. Who he viewed as sedated by religion and tradition, etc. In the 1840s the Orthodox church was all powerful in rural Russia compared to more industrialized places like London or Berlin where the church was losing its sway. I think this is what Marx was talking about with the "opiate of the people" business. And part of the reason why he expected communist revolution to arise first in western countries like Germany and Britain and not Russia.

Where I think Marx went wrong is that he underestimated the productive power of industrialization. When he wrote the Communist Manifesto in the 1840s industrial workers were lucky to have a one-room tenement, three meals a day, and a spare set of clothes. He didn't conceive that modern workers could own cars, TVs, iPhones, bass boats, big houses, fatten themselves on an excess of calories, and have too many clothes to fit in their closets. Or that their children would receive a free public education and the ability to rise above their class station.

In light of your comments here, it is interesting to note the extent to which anarchism (of Machno at least) went over well in the peasant villages, and seemingly was actually viable in the setting of former surfs, while it utterly failed to gain traction in the industrial areas. [I do not know for sure, but I suspect class consciousness played into this, because I would suspect that the down-trodden factory workers were not from the population of the recently freed surfs. ('Recently' in terms of about 2 generations, or roughly 55 years.) I also wish I knew more about how it functioned in respect to the industrial operations in the Mennonite colonies. Perhaps they never got that far, since they were also fighting the Reds and the Whites. But it is not possible to know how long his new society might have lasted, if it were not for that outside opposition. The final destruction of the colony life came later, at the hands of the Reds, more so during the reign of Joseph Stalin.]

Yeah, I don't know enough about the history of the Menno colonies in Ukraine to comment. Except to say that they were very much on the periphery and mostly suffered from political waves rippling outwards from events happening long distances away.

I'm simply commenting that the socialist revolutions of the 20th century happened on a much different trajectory than mid-19th Century Marx predicted. He was living in a world in which revolutions were, indeed, sweeping across western and central Europe. He wrote the Communist Manifesto in 1948, the same year in which revolutions popped up across industrial cities in western and Central Europe but notably NOT Russia or Ukraine or any rural lands to the east. He thought communism would follow the same path.

[barnhart]

1848, not 1948.

[Ken]

1848, not 1948.

Yes, typo up there on my part. Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto in 1848, the same year that much of Europe erupted into revolutions. Marx died in 1883, long before the Russian revolution which happened in 1917.