We are all born with this insatiable urge to worship. It most often manifests itself as an urge to belong: whether to God or to a group, we all feel a longing to belong. We also feel a need to surrender our will to that of a higher authority: to feel safe in knowing we do not need to decide, to just do what we’re told. All of this explained in Nature’s Law as well as Scripture, but many of us rebel and seek to substitute ourselves for God. Aside from the fact that this is the essence of original sin, it is also the foundation for the allure of many man-made ideas of how society should be organized and controlled. It is especially so when we’re dealing with Marxism and its many forms of collectivist offspring. If you understand that we are all made to worship our Creator, and that many of us – in our arrogance and pride – chose instead to rebel, then you will understand how Marxism is nothing more than a substitution for the structure and control of the Church over the masses.
This is actually not that difficult to understand. You do need to have some knowledge of the world in which Marx lived: how it was shaking itself free from dictatorships where the State and Church were intertwined and God was never really at the center of either’s concern. You also need to understand that the public sentiment of “enlightenment;” that reason could and would eventually explain everything about our world. For too many, this gave rise to a belief in materialism, where everything that could be measured was embraced and everything that could not be measured or explained in terms of matter was dismissed as “superstition.” This was the world in which Marx dreamed up his utopian designs for how society should be organized and, since Marx believed his “enlightenment” did away with the “superstitious need to worship,” he replaced religion with the State.
But here is where things undergo a bit of a change. Up to this point, power had traditionally lain in the hands of the powerful and ruthless. The Greek’s notion of the “philosopher kings” had never taken hold – until now. Now, the self-appointed “enlightened” believed that their “superior” understanding of science, matter and reason made them the proper heir to the reins of power. This is the appeal in Marxism: it allows the intellectual a path to the seat of power. Now, instead of being the village nerd and being forced to accept equality with every other member of society, the self-described intellectual could claim he was superior and that his superior understanding made him the proper person to rule society. Obviously, Marxism wasn’t the only new paradigm that appealed to this new elite, but because Marx stressed “science and reason” as the foundation for his ideas, Marxism held the greatest appeal for these new-found “intelligentsia.” But in reality, all Marx was doing was looking for a way to replace the leaders of the old State and Church with himself.
So it is that, under Marxism, the leader of the Revolution took the place of the Pope; and his captains, the place of the Cardinals; and his lieutenants, the place of the bishops. Further down the hierarchical line, the bureaucrats became the new priests and the technocrats became the new scribes. And thus, the nerds use their claims of science and reason against the public’s embrace of the sentiment of “advancement” under these banners to establish a new form of power and oust the leaders of old: the kings and Church. It was a poisonous promise against which the greed of the people could offer no defense. Here is a group of supposedly enlightened men telling the masses that they could use “science” to make everyone as rich as a king or leader of the Church, the source of wealth in that time. How many people who were used to starving would reject such a promise? But, in the end, nothing changed: man is still subservient to tyrants. The only change is that Marx and his followers took the place of the king and Church, and instead of worshiping God, the State now demanded that it be worshiped instead. And what could possibly be more alluring to the arrogance and pride of the narcissistic intellectual than using his “command of reason” to exalt himself to the position of god?