Jarryd Louw

Granting the idea that certain theoretical conceptualisations of Marxism broadly represent a political religion, this paper seeks to explore how one can come to understand the function of individual theoretical concepts within the wider theory of Stalinism. In so doing, this approach to political religion will be explored within the confines of Stalin’s concept of the Intensification of Class Struggle under Socialism. Assuming that individual theoretical concepts of an ideology that has been labelled a political religion serve the same function as doctrines within traditional religion, this paper argues that the Intensification of Class Struggle under Socialism can be interpreted as having an apocalyptic quality. By doing so, this paper seeks to extend the boundaries of both the study of political religion and the theoretical exploration of Marxism as it relates to the question and role of religion within the social and political sphere. While doing so, this paper also seeks to provide an illustration of what the exploration of political religion in relation to Marxism looks like at the level of specific theoretical elements as opposed to a mere overarching characterisation of the entire theoretical enterprise.

This present paper is concerned with clarifying the relationship between the specifics of revolution and historical Dasein as elaborated by Herbert Marcuse in his early work concerning Heideggerian Marxism. In this early work, Marcuse identifies the industrial proletariat as constituting an expression of historical Dasein and in which the eventual proletarian revolution not only brings about the liberation of the proletariat from the effects of capitalism but also allows for the authentic expression of historical Dasein. While Marcuse holds that this authentic expression of Dasein will take place through revolutionary means leading to a post-capitalist society, he does not explicate the relationship between historical Dasein and revolution itself beyond drawing upon the relationship between the proletariat and revolution as already expressed in early 20th century Marxism. Because of this, Marcuse’s work overlooks the possibility that there is a distinction between just the liberation of the proletariat and the authentic expression of historical Dasein. In relation to this, it will be argued in this paper that the authentic expression of historical Dasein requires more than mere revolutionary action that brings about either a worker’s state as per Lenin or merely the lower stage of communism as per Marx. Rather, it will be argued, through the exploration of the relationship between historical Dasein and revolution itself that the authentic expression of Dasein within a Heideggerian Marxist framework can only be achieved under the higher stage of communism as per Marx.