Marxist Analysis of Religion

Karl Marx’s view of society was based around the economy. All other social structures according to Marx, such as religion, family values, and politics stem from the base, the economy. Religion played no part at all in Marx’s sociological views. He is known as an atheist. He believed that religion was nothing more than a burden on society. “The

Karl Marx a Marxist sees religion as an illusion and that the phenomenon of religion is part of what Marx refers to as an alienation of people

The bourgeoisies made sure that the only way of survival for the working class was through them. Marx even believed that the churches were oppressing the proletarians because the bourgeoisies were controlling the churches. Therefore, Marx thought that religion should be abolished. Another thing that Marx believed had no existence was the government because the bourgeoisie held all political power.3

Marx put forward his conception of historical materialism for the first time in German Ideology in 1845-6. He believed that it was

In 1848, Marx, a German philosopher, wrote a supposedly scientific account of his perspective on history entitled The Communist Manifesto. As a materialist philosopher, he believed that economics was at the heart of history. He examined the tools and technology being used to understand the material substructure of how people were fed and clothed.

Though Marx and Kuyper agreed on the need to change the inequality between the different classes, their views regarding religion differed. Marx thought

Marxist believe that religion acts inevitably as a conservative force because religion is an ideological state apparatus which spreads capitalist ideas, thus maintains the social hierarchy, and in doing so maintains harmony and consensus in society. This is reinforced by Marx who claims religion is the opium of the people hence religion dulls the pain of oppression for them. Marx claims that religion is still a conservative force as through the use of ideology it justifies the oppression of the proletariat e.g. in the hymn ‘rich man at his castle the poor man at his gate, god made them high and ordered their estate’. This suggests god created inequality; as a result

Karl Marx said what about religion? Why might this be significant? Karl said religion is important, people need something to believe

his religion. Marx writes, "The more man puts into God the less he retains in

"The German Jews seek emancipation. What kind of emancipation do they want? Civic, political emancipation"(Tucker, p. 26). From his opening sentences on, Marx looks to the case of the Jews to shed light on how people can become free. Bruno Bauer had argued that Judaism, with its arrogant particularity, prevented Jews from participating fully in the life of the state. If they would agree, for instance, to attend legislative sessions even when they took place on Saturday, then Jews would be eligible for the full set of rights political emancipation (Fischman, p.762). If Jews, Christians, or Muslims hold onto their religious practices, it is evidence that the state is not fulfilling their needs, and that the nonpolitical still exerts great power over their choices. The incapacity of purely political means to make people free is not, however, confined to the state's defeat by religion. The political elevation of man above religion shares the weaknesses and merits of all such political measures. For Bauer and Marx, "the existence of religion is the existence of a defect" (Tucker, p. 31). Marx and Bauer want the Jews to give up there religion in order to be one with the state. They feel like the Jews will never understand political emancipation without first putting the state above their own religion. They have to want the state to come first in both their public and private lives. Marx does not take the Jewish faith that seriously. Marx views the Jewish religion as lacking the power to produce illusory happiness. Marx identifies Judaism with the economic arrangements he finds prevailing in capitalist society and the abolition of Judaism with the transcendence of capitalism (Fischman,

While both Locke and Marx believed that religion should be held separate from politics, diversion in ideology can be seen through the fact that Locke felt that religious life should be privatized, while Marx believed that religion becomes superfluous, and therefore unnecessary in a society in which power is appropriated to all of its masses. Locke’s “Letter Concerning Toleration” and Marx’s “Manifesto of the Communist Party” showcase the dynamic, oft-conflicting nature of power and control that the institution of formalized religion and politics have imparted on human consciousness, with Locke and Marx proving similar in their convictions that politics should be distinctly maintained, though differing on their stance on the privatization of

Generally, Marx’s position on religion is drawn up in an entirely negative manner. In his writings, he expresses his belief that religion is a set of doctrines intended to stabilize, while at the same time bring into servitude the working class people. In addition to that, he argues that the society’s inclination towards religious excitement serves to represent a reaction to disaffection. Also, Marx contends that, since religion causes human beings to feel delusive happiness it makes an erroneous mental representation in as well as of itself. Indeed to him, it is an instrument utilized to sustain cultural systems together with ideologies that in most cases encourages oppression in the society (Parsons 38-46).

The two theorists i’ve decided to compare and contrast are Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim. Firstly i’ll compare them to one another. From all the readings I did and past education on these individuals I found they have a lot of the same views in regards to religion. Both Emlie Durkheim and Karl Marx believe that religion is a projection of mans hopes and desires. They both also agree that religion plays a powerful role in influencing the members of a society. While coming up with these theories they were both more concerned with the human rather than the religion. Both of them did not believe in a god or gods. It’s been said that Marx saw god as idealization of human nature while Durkheim believed the idea of a god was society itself. They were not religious people so it’s interesting that they did have some of the same views and theories regarding religion in the society.

Following the Industrial Revolution in 19th century Europe, change was in full swing and religion began to have different meanings for different people. The upper-class citizens used Religion, namely Christianity, and the power that it possessed in an attempt to keep their high status in society, while the lower class turned to faith so that their lives could possibly improve. Instead of religion being the cornerstone of faith and worship amongst all people, it was being used for power and money by the upper class. Even worse, religious leaders were using the upper class people as well, gaining money and authority from their endorsement. A man by the name of Karl Marx saw

For Weber, religion can be seen as a factor which pushes for social change, while for Marx it is essentially used as a conservation, keeping the wealthy, wealthy and suppressing the poor