Research Paper
Socialism, Marxism, and Critical Theory
Jane Doe
PLCY 802-D02: Competing Visions of Statesmanship
November 14, 2021
1
INTRODUCTION
Humans have a desire to make sense and assign meaning to life (Fischer 2018). This is
where worldviews are introduced as comprehensive intellectual, emotional, and spiritual
frameworks. Political ideologies are outcomes of specific worldviews. For instance, the
worldview of naturalism believes in the physical being stating that spiritual beings cannot
account for logic (Fischer 2018). Marxism and socialism are derivatives of naturalism and
assume that only a physical universe exists and human free will is only an illusion. People do
make choices; however, they are simply products of the physical environment (Fischer 2018).
Postmodernism is a worldview that rejects modernism, naturalism, and secularism. This
view acknowledges that humans are physical beings, but emotions also exist and are explained
by science, logic, and reason (Fischer 2018). Postmodernism also deduces that oppression
involves more than just economics; people also use ideas, words, and cultural norms, unlike
Marxism, which focuses on the economic problem of exploitation (Fischer 2018).
Critical theory is a derivative of Marxism and discourages a belief in absolute truth
finding meaning on a more personal and emotional level (Fischer 2018). Worldviews that do not
encourage a belief in an objective truth, such as postmodernism, have a negative impact on
society. Interacting in a way that respects the “truths” of others has become socially acceptable
and “more appropriate to the pursuit of knowledge than pretending to possess an objectivity that
does not exist” (Williams 2002, 261). Critical theory studies unspoken societal cultural norms,
their utilization of mistreatment, and how deconstruction can occur (Fischer 2018). This
philosophy may sound idyllic because it does allow the unpacking of specific norms and the
effects on individuals, but there is one major problem. If Marxism ignores free will and the
secular worldview rejects the concept of good and evil, it is difficult for the critical theorist to
2
successfully deconstruct and implement change since it does not allow for a moral authority to
critique (Fischer 2018).
Socialism is an economic and political ideology attributed to Karl Marx that advocates
for state ownership of non-human means or factors of production and a centralized planned
economy (Kyambalesa 2019). Marxism is similar to socialism because it is also an economic and
political ideology of Marx but differs, the goal is creating a communist state by “abandoning
capitalism and establishing a socialist state as a transitory phase” (Kyambalesa 2019, 2). Neither
are consistent with human nature which is liberty seeking and self-centered (Kyambalesa 2019).
The biblical worldview counteracts these perceptions because humans are intelligent
beings that can communicate and grasp metaphysical truth; this results in free will decision
making. This ideology also provides a spiritual component and the implementation of logic
making Christianity the best logical explanation for life (Fischer 2018). This point of view was
once the popular opinion in American society. Over the years, Americans have moved away from
a biblical mindset and instead embrace a secular view often on the basis of overcoming
oppression caused by religion (Anderson 2019). Ironically, the American government is founded
on biblical principles that were employed to triumph over persecution from a government that
denied freedoms. When using emotional arguments, unreasonable mindsets can seem rational
(Anderson 2019).
MARXISM
Marx’s narrative promises that the future belongs, “as a matter of certainty, to the
dispossessed proletariat” (Koyzis 2019, 168). What attracted early societies to Marxism was the
goal of diminishing want and class-based oppression forming a utopian society (Koyzis 2019).
Once the proletariat became the majority and socialized production, unfairness would end
3
because classism would no longer exist. Marx’s views were extremely flawed; he miscalculated
the desire and necessity for social revolutions (Simkhovitch 1912). The breakdown of capitalism,
uprising of the proletariat, universal crises, and every other radical prediction he had, did not
come to fruition. Societies were shifting from agricultural decentralization naturally without
political coups. The “concentration of wealth and proletarization of the middle class has proved a
fable; the middle incomes are steadily growing” (Simkhovitch 1912, 82). The class struggle was
dissipating in the midst of industrialization.
People proved Marx wrong because a civilized society has the ability to further social and
economic change that did not require a revolution but through democratic means. “In a
democracy the will of the majority is supposed to rule. There can be, therefore, no occasion for a
revolution, unless it be a revolution of a minority against the will of the majority” (Simkhovitch
1912, 85). Since an overhaul of societies did not include a revolutionary act of destruction,
according to Marx, “socialism without a revolution is impossible” (Simkhovitch 1912, 86). Marx
often criticized the idea of utopianism when in fact, he was a revolutionary utopian who grasped
the masses converting them to become anti-utopian scientific socialists (Simkhovitch 1912).
Marx relied on economics using class struggle as the foundation of all injustices in society and
therefore could be resolved economically (Koyzis 2019). Human nature, however, is not that
simple. Inequalities occur naturally in society and are generally dependent on individual choices
not relating to economics or lack of resources.
SOCIALISM
The philosophy of Marxism created the economic system of socialism, an ideology that
pledges to save society through fundamental change through a radical social critique since
inequality produces conflict and competition over available supplies (Koyzis 2019). Socialist
4
parties often gain power by democratic means; however, strong authority must exist for
transition and control of the process of collectivism. “Socialism, particularly in its Marxist form,
begins to become highly undemocratic in practice, despite its spiritual roots in the doctrine of
popular sovereignty” (Koyzis 2019, 158). It then becomes easy for the creation of totalitarian
regimes and abuse of power. A prominent example is Venezuela, an oil rich country that
ultimately embraced socialism causing people to experience shortages on basic goods even
though Venezuela possesses wealth through oil. The government and the elites took advantage of
power leading the country to turn into a “personal dictatorship” (Koyzis 2019, 174). For the
socialist, the way to achieve equality is by pooling together resources and communal ownership
of property into a “single metaphorical pot from which everyone can draw as needed” (Koyzis
2019, 153).
Marx believed that widespread forceful revolutions determined to overthrow the capitalist
system would occur and pave the way for socialist societies (Oizerman 2009). Marx did not
provide any details about the revolution, nor did he list an example of a country that was in the
process. Marx’s theories were speculative based on his interpretation of how others viewed or
should view their role in society (Oizerman 2009). Marx’s prediction did not come to maturity.
Countries today do not show a necessity for a transition from capitalism to socialism. Capitalism
with social programs also diminishes the argument of moving to a socialist system. People have
economic freedom, and the state assists the needy (Shanin 2018). Ultimately, the idea of a
revolution was simply utopian, Marx’s error in his analysis of human desires.
Socialism was used as a movement in colonized countries for emancipation from the
colonial power, not capitalism, which was greater than economic exploitation (Lane 2020). This
utilization of socialist revolution was not what Marx had in mind when he wrote his theories and
5
there was no explanation on how to move forward (Lane 2020). The most prominent example of
the implementation of Marx’s theories is the Bolshevist Revolution in Russia which created the
Soviet Union. This revolution did not eliminate capitalist exploitation; the newly formed
government simply took the place of the capitalist class and continued exploitation (Oizerman
2009). Post-World War II, capitalism flourished, launching a scientific technological revolution,
“radically transforming material production and essentially changing all social relations”
(Oizerman 2009, 49). This eventually caused the Soviet renunciation of socialism as it was
incapable of “carrying out a thorough technological revolution and raising labour productivity
and national consumption up to the level attained by the capitalist countries” (Oizerman 2009,
49).
Marx believed that economic classes would drive social change and revert back to the
first form of human society which he deemed primitive communism (Lane 2020). This was a
society that did not have competition or a class struggle; “classes are not therefore inherent in
human society; they are a consequence of, and can be eliminated by, human action” (Lane 2020,
1308). Marx often generalized the development of capitalism during his lifetime in the 19th
century not considering that capitalism could evolve positively in a society as humans changed
(Lane 2020). Eliminating competition is impractical because it is a “natural element in every
sphere and facet of human endeavor” (Kyambalesa 2019, 5). The determination of an
individual’s success or failure is a direct result of their ability to compete against others in
society (Kyambalesa 2019).
CRITICAL THEORY
Critical theory, a combination of multiple ideologies, can be difficult to define. However,
its origins are in German philosophy from Immanuel Kant, Georg Hegel, and Karl Marx which
6
inspired individuals to create the Institute for Social Research located in Germany (Rassmussen
2012). While critical theory has roots in Marxism, the ideology is still relevant in today’s society
and is applied to various contemporary topics such as feminism and post-colonial theories
(Formby 2012).
Psychoanalysis plays a role in critical theory regarding the understanding of individual
personality and irrational political events and can serve as a political function in specific social
situations (Bronner and Kellen 1989). It is often questioned how the masses fall prey to certain
ideologies; oftentimes propaganda and lies are influential. When it is understood that those
particular beliefs are delusions, addressing the root of the deception is the only way to effectively
contribute to the further development of society (Bronner and Kellen 1989). For instance, the
belief in witchcraft was so prominent in the 17th century that women were convicted during the
Salem Witch Trials in the 1600s (Oster 2004). Time and the advancement of science caused the
delusion of witches and magic to cease (Bronner and Kellen 1989). No new information was
brought to the surface other than examining theories and more education. Regarding Sigmund
Freud’s work, “its primary importance does not lie in the fact that psychological research and
knowledge have been enriched by new findings but in fact that for some fifty years the
intellectual, and especially the educational, world has been made more and more aware
of...society’s usually naive ignorance of the psychological dynamics of the life” (Bronner and
Kellner 1989, 220).
An individual's personality is developed by political, economic, and social convictions
that form a broad and coherent pattern (Bronner and Kellner 1989). This also contributes to the
development of an individual’s ideology and can take ideas from existing ideologies to create
their own. Personalities are driven by various components such as wishes and emotional
7
impulses which is why personalities and viewpoints are not identical even for those who belong
to the same social group (Bronner and Kellner 1989). The psychological structure of the
individual means that people will support different political and social programs depending on
their interests and how it will influence their position in society (Bronner and Kellner 1989).
This ideology, unlike Marxism, focuses on more than just economics. Some individuals
have irrational beliefs that politicians exploit such as extreme views on immigration and
socialism. To combat this perspective, the ego aspect of personality must become “aware and
take responsibility for nonrational forces operating within the personality” (Bronner and Kellner
1989, 232). Prejudicial or discriminatory beliefs become popular, not by rational self-interest, but
by emotion. This strategy is used to tug at the heart strings of individuals so they will support a
specific policy or social program (Bronner and Kellner 1989).
AMERICAN SOCIETY
Younger generations of Americans do not have the same fear of socialism as older
generations. This is because of the debate that leads people to believe in the ideology, the
concept of fairness. Socialism vows to make society equal with the government distributing fair
economic benefits to individuals in society (Koyzis 2019). The fact that not everyone in society
has acquired wealth or property creates the perception of structural oppression causing
individuals to struggle to provide for their families. When this occurs, it is explained away by
economic injustice, making socialism appealing. The government does not have the
responsibility of providing a livelihood for its citizens nor eradicating poverty (Koyzis 2019).
For justice to exist on a large scale a government must: care for what is common in
society such as the physical environment, play a minimal role lessening discrimination in the
market so people are treated more fairly, and assume some responsibility for those experiencing
8
economic difficulties by ensuring the legal system is not corrupt (Koyzis 2019). If the
government does more, totalitarianism is a major risk. President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society
is an example of the government attempting to assert authority to eliminate poverty and
economic inequality (Murray 1984). This plan was not successful because there are multiple
reasons why people end up in these circumstances, some having nothing to do with economics.
Poverty is not caused by capitalism; therefore, socialism is not the answer. Capitalism is focused
on the individual while socialism is a negation of this ego advocating for the collective (Bronner
and Kellner 1989). Socialism is unable to recognize limits of the government due to “going
against the grain of human nature and misreading the large human story” (Koyzis 2019, 181).
Socialism, Marxism, and critical theory have influenced American politics and societal norms in
various sectors generally relying on emotional arguments as justification.
Family
The biblical model of the family was once prominent in American society. The father was
the head of the household and the provider, the mother was the nurturer, cared and educated the
children, then children who often experienced discipline from the father. The further away the
United States shifts from biblical beliefs, the traditional family structure is no longer revered. It
is instead often described as sexist and patriarchal, “the decline in the role of the father follows
the decline of the role of private and family enterprise” (Bronner and Kellner 1989, 235). The
father’s role has now been replaced by external authorities, generally the government through
welfare, expanded during the Great Society, that benefit single mothers (Moffitt 2015).
The government also twisted the traditional, biblical view of marriage by permitting the
legalization of same sex marriage in 2015 (Thomas 2018). The major religions of Christianity,
Islam, and Judaism are in opposition fearing religious freedom is threatened. “Those concerned
9
with religious freedom worry that such efforts will marginalize traditional religious views with
regard to homosexuality (much like critical theorists worry that tolerance will marginalize
homosexuality)” (Thomas 2018, 65). Society has attempted to normalize homosexual families
buy including them in commercials, tv shows, movies, advertisements, and in public schools
(Mason 2017).
Even state laws have changed now allowing homosexual couples to adopt children and
the ability to sue religious organizations who do not comply because it goes against their biblical
worldview of the definition of a family (Carroll 2018). Those who do not support or
acknowledge this lifestyle as legitimate are deemed homophobic and hateful, of course this is
often not the case (Krull 2017). Christians are commanded to love the sin and hate the sinner and
that covers any lifestyle or practice that is not biblical. Christians must obey this to bring others
to Christ (Neuhaus 2003). While there are some extremist groups like the Westboro Baptist
Church, most Christians do not react in a stereotypical way such as name calling or Bible
throwing when interacting with those engaging in nonbiblical lifestyles (Baker et al. 2012).
Religion
Since the founding, Christianity has been the predominant religion for Americans.
Biblical principles were reflected in laws and every aspect of society (Barton 2008). Over the
years, this ideology has shifted. Religious views are no longer celebrated; they are considered
outdated, discriminatory, and bigoted (Anderson 2019). Americans are concerned about what
will happen if Christianity is completely removed from society; the very fabric of America’s
political order and culture could be destroyed because these are “attacks on the founding
principles of America” (Anderson 2019, 17). Christianity once held a dominant position in
10
society; however, the presence of Christianity has continuously dwindled from societal
institutions that once adhered to biblical principles (Yancey 2019).
Critical theory claims that the traditional theistic concept of religion has changed into
what can be considered humanistic religiosity. This was framed by the non-theistic philosophies
of Buddhism and Marxism (Siebert et al. 2013). As the world transitioned from modernism to
post-modernism, people do not desire to become victims of a culture industry nor accept
traditional Abrahamic religions and the belief in God. “The new humanistic religiosity may
develop in family, society, state, history, and culture, without the need for a separate religious
organization” (Siebert et al. 2013, 40). This worldview furthers the erroneous argument that an
individual can be good or moral without religious beliefs in God.
BIBLICAL STATESMANSHIP
The principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence are biblically based tying
together both Christianity and patriotism (Boyer 2001). Christianity also promotes psychological
well-being and reduction of anxiety because “citizens of a Republic whose founding document
holds out happiness, or at least the pursuit of happiness, as a national entitlement” (Boyer 2001,
550). The love of God and the love of country was embraced in early American history. This
ideology did become problematic. People associated Christianity with American values so when
one became disillusioned with the country, they stopped going to church (Williams 2002). It is
important to understand that “to be a Christian is to have a relationship with the source of all life
through faith in Jesus Christ” (Williams 2002, 259). Church attendance and a belief in Christ
should not be based on patriotism.
Christians were not exempt from the influence of Marxist doctrine. During the 1960s and
1970s, many countries in Latin America were fighting for independence or regime changes
11
embracing the Marxist ideology to support their class struggle (Saresella 2021, 13). American
Christians saw similarities with the Vietnam War protests and the Civil Rights Movement. Some
Christians decided to adopt the Marxist philosophy as a way to analyze and facilitate social
change (Saresella 2021). Those who supported Marxism “were convinced that capitalism was
antithetical to Christianity and that the basic values of Christian faith, expressed in the Bible and
tradition, were undermined and destroyed by Capitalism” (Saresella 2021, 13).
It is interesting that American Christians attempted to fight for a cause in a country
where widespread corrupt actions of political regimes did not occur. The ruling classes in Latin
American countries often misused Christianity as justification for social dominance (Saresella
2021). Not all Christians supported Marxism; those who actually studied the philosophy
understood that it was hostile to Christianity since, atheism, not religious beliefs were
encouraged (Saresella 2021). “Christians cannot assent to this philosophy without sacrificing the
affirmation of God which is essential to their outlook” (Saresella 2021, 14).
American Christians have become more relaxed regarding morality and sin, “not only do
they treat the sinner with charity, but they’ve become curiously indifferent to the sin” (Orwin
2004, 27). Christians of the 21st century are not equal with those from 70 years ago, “for the first
time in the nation’s history, religious opinion does not inhibit society as a whole” (Orwin 2004,
27). While not everyone believed in Christianity, it was accepted by Americans as part of
mainstream society (Orwin 2004). Those in secular society who have denounced religion still
rely on the “Judeo-Christian legacy of concern with human dignity despite their rejection of the
revealed truth that alone could support this concern” (Orwin 2004, 31).
12
CONCLUSION
Socialism and the philosophy of Marxism believe that solutions to societal economic
injustice are physical and should be manipulated by the state. Since Marxism dismisses free will,
conflicts can only be resolved through statism (Fischer 2018). The state should intervene in the
economy and redistribution of wealth even though this alters the structure of society (Fischer
2018). This is acceptable because “for socialists the ultimate goal is material equality” (Koyzis
2019, 165).
Because critical theory does not have a moral basis, actions that address injustice can
only be authorized by the government (Fischer 2018). Society’s view of the government’s role
has become warped (Koyzis 2019). For example, the power of speech can lead to repression. If
speech is legislated by the government, to create a harmonious society, the result is lack of
freedom of conscience, violation of inalienable rights, and undermining foundation of freedoms
(Fischer 2018). Regardless of the government’s behavior, if peace is provided, the perception is
that the government is operating benevolently (Koyzis 2019). This benevolence, however,
revokes American constitutional rights; all speech must be protected to ensure an overall system
of justice (Fischer 2018). Individuals are not held accountable for determining what is and is not
acceptable to say, that obligation is given to the government.
A biblical worldview does not deny societal issues, such as economic exploitation, exist.
Government intervention by way of redistributing wealth is not the solution since that would be
infringing upon the liberties and freedom of the people (Fischer 2018). The secular worldview
advocates socialism as the answer to capitalistic exploitation ultimately creating progress in
civilization applying the utopian ideal of a classless society (Koyzis 2019). The only
responsibility of the state, however, is to safeguard the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and
13
property, not taking from one to give to another ensuring a comfortable economic lifestyle
(Fischer 2018).
14
REFERENCES
Anderson, Troy. 2019. “The War to Destroy Christian America.” The New American.
Baker, Joseph O., Christopher D. Bader, and Kittye Hirsch. 2015. “Desecration, Moral
Boundaries, and the Movement of Law: The Case of Westboro Baptist Church.” Deviant
Behavior 36 (1): 42–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2014.906282.
Barton, David. 2008. Original Intent: The Courts, the Constitution, and Religion. Aledo, Texas:
WallBuilders.
Boyer, Paul. 2001. “ Two Centuries of Christianity in America: An Overview .” Church History
70 (3): 544–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/3654501.
Bronner, Stephen and Kellner, Douglas. 1989. Critical Theory and Society. New York:
Routledge.
Carroll, Megan. 2018. “Gay Fathers on the Margins: Race, Class, Marital Status, and Pathway to
Parenthood.” Family Relations 67 (1): 104–17.
Fischer, Kahlib. 2018. “Socialism, Marxism, and Critical Theory.” PLCY802 Course
Presentation Blackboard, Liberty University.
Formby, Dan. 2012. “Why Marxism and Critical Theory Still Matter.” New Critique.
Koyzis, David T. 2019. Political Visions & Illusions: A Survey & Christian Critique of
Contemporary Ideologies. Westmont, IL: IVP Academic Press.
Krull, Douglas. 2017. “On Hating the Sin but Loving the Sinner: Judgments about
Homosexuality and Religiosity.” Journal of Psychology and Christianity 36 (2): 99.
Kyambalesa, Henry. 2019. “A Critique of Socialism and Marxism.” SSRN Electronic Journal.
Lane, David. 2020. “Building Socialism: From ‘Scientific’ to ‘Active’ Marxism.” Third World
Quarterly 41 (8): 1306–21.
Mason, Katherine. 2018. “‘Won’t Someone Think of the Children?’: Reproductive Futurism and
Same-Sex Marriage in US Courts, 2003-2015.” Sexuality Research and Social Policy 15
(1): 83–98.
Moffitt, Robert A. 2015. “The Deserving Poor, the Family, and the U.S. Welfare System.”
Demography 52 (3).
Murray, Charles. 1984. Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980. New York: Basic
Books.
Neuhaus, Richard. 2003. “Re-Evangelizing a ‘Post-Christian’ World.” First Things : A Journal of
15
Religion and Public Life.
Oizerman, Theodor I. 2009. “Paradoxes in the Communist Theory of Marxism.” Diogenes 56 (2–
3): 37–50.
Orwin, Clifford. 2004. “Unraveling of Christianity in America.” Public Interest 155.
Oster, Emily. 2004. “Witchcraft, Weather and Economic Growth in Renaissance Europe.”
Journal of Economic Perspectives 18 (1): 215–28.
Rasmussen, David. 2012. “Critical Theory.” The Journal of Speculative Philosophy 26 (2).
Saresella, Daniela. 2021. “Left-Wing Christians at Berkeley: Between the Theology of
Liberation and Marxist Theories.” Religions 12 (10): 880.
Shanin, Teodor. 2018. “Marxism and the Vernacular Revolutionary Traditions.” Journal of
Peasant Studies 45 (7): 1151–76.
Simkhovitch, Vladimir G. 1912. “Marxism Versus Socialism.” Political Science Quarterly 27
(1): 73–91.
Thomas, George. 2018. “Religious Liberty, Same-Sex Marriage and Public Accommodations.”
Perspectives on Politics 16 (1): 58–72.
Williams, D Newell. 2002. “Christianity in Twentieth Century America : Implications for the
Twenty-First Century.” Encounter 63 (3).
Yancey, George. 2019. “Is Christianity Still the Dominant Religion in the United States?”
Journal of Contemporary Religion 36 (1): 143–60.
