Marxism and Christianity: taking Roger Garaudy's project seriously
Files
Item Status
Embargo End Date
Date
Authors
Roche, Julian Spencer
Abstract
Roger Garaudy occupied a position at the centre of the debate with Louis Althusser, Lucien Sève and
others over Marxist humanism within the French Communist Party. That, and his active participation
in the Marxist–Christian dialogue, ensured that what he said, wrote and did was widely reported at
the time. Even those who have continued to analyse the complex relationship between Marxism and
Christianity rarely ignore his role.
All this changed completely when he was expelled from the Party in 1970. His subsequent adoption
of a project which was both Marxist and Christian lasted just a decade, compared to an intellectual
and political life that stretched from before World War II until well into the 21st Century. This period
of his intellectual life and the project that he undertook has attracted no specific study. There are
several reasons for this neglect. Firstly, Marxist commentators were either still Communist Party
members and sought only to make political capital out of his expulsion, or they were sympathetic to
Garaudy, eager to demonstrate continuity in his work, and therefore not seeking to emphasise his
work after he left the Party. Secondly, Christians were suspicious of a former Party member, especially
given that his Christianity did not seem to fit conventional understanding. Thirdly, Garaudy’s populist
style and ability to reach a mass audience distanced him from the academic world. Many of the central
ideas of the project are scattered across different publications, and nowhere written up for academic
publication. Then, after his conversion to Islam in 1982, his work was almost completely
overshadowed by perceptions of his association with the Islamic world, especially after his conviction
for Holocaust denial in 1998. The result is that Garaudy’s project has been largely lost to history,
rejected by Marxists and Christians alike.
This thesis by contrast focuses directly on the project itself, broadly covering his independent years
between expulsion from the Party and his conversion. The result of this focus has been to uncover a
very different and much more radical relationship between Marxism and Christianity within the
project than Garaudy had ever evinced during his previous period as a Marxist humanist. Some
elements of Garaudy’s previous Marxist humanism are retained, just as some are carried forward, if
erratically, into his subsequent adherence to Islam. More importantly, however, for the Garaudy of
the project, not only does Marxism need to be revised in political terms, but it also stands in need of
two key concepts directly derived from Christianity: subjectivity and transcendence. There is therefore
a need for detailed examination of the meaning, significance and plausibility of both concepts within
Garaudy’s project.
What emerges from Garaudy’s project is a Marxism that appears very contemporary in its emphasis
on the individual, its ecological politics, and in its insistence on the essential role of religion in human
emancipation. The world has however moved on significantly since then. The next stage in the analysis
of the project is therefore whether it still has relevance in the 21st Century, and to what extent. Others
have developed a very different relationship between Marxism and Christianity, notably and in very
different ways, Slavoj Žižek and Terry Eagleton. Their work is placed in the context of whether they
have something to offer to improve Garaudy’s project. The assessment, however, is that neither of
them has produced a better blueprint for the relationship between Marxism and Christianity than
Garaudy had already offered. This is not to suggest that Garaudy’s project represents the last word.
Other areas of thought and action that Garaudy left unexplored within the project, ethics in particular,
are also considered as candidates for inclusion in a revised project.
There is no doubt that Garaudy’s project was fragile — his subsequent trajectory proved it. Overall,
however, the conclusion is very positive. In abandoning it, Garaudy threw away the key to how
Christianity can provide a plausible basis on which to revise Marxism. Whilst recognising the import of
his conversion, and condemning what followed, there is therefore good reason to take Garaudy’s
project seriously in the contemporary world, and to revise it, as the basis on which an enduring and
potentially successful relationship between Marxists and Christians can yet be built.
This item appears in the following Collection(s)

