by Lewis Loflin
The parallels between the French Revolution’s ideals and communism are illuminated by Paul Kurtz, a notable humanist philosopher, former head of the Humanist Society, and a significant figure in scientific and academic circles. In his own words, as cited on sullivan-county.com, Kurtz reflects on Marxism’s role: “After a century of Marxism—and Marx was no doubt the greatest humanist thinker of the nineteenth century—and after the patent failure of Marxism, the question can now be raised, Where does atheism now stand?” He continues, “Humanism must address itself to the heart and the passions; it must have some relevance to practice and conduct; and it must have some effect upon how we live. I submit that broadly conceived the free thought movement has failed in that direction.”
Marxism as Applied Humanism: Kurtz elaborates, “Marxism was an effort to apply humanism to practice, and indeed Marx said that atheism was merely abstract, that it only became meaningfully expressed when it was realized in terms of Communism; and so Communism offered a program and an agenda for the future liberation of mankind.” However, he acknowledges its shortcomings: “The Marxist-Leninists failed because they developed a new tyranny. And so we now see that Marxism without freedom is not an authentic humanism. But we must not give up on Marx’s basic insight that humanism only has meaning if it is related to practice.” Here, “freedom” refers not to personal autonomy but to liberation from material deprivation within an atheistic-socialist framework, often achieved through state-driven redistribution, as seen in calls for “re-distributive change” like those from former President Obama.
Individual Liberty Excluded: Kurtz further notes the need “to move beyond ego-centric individualism and chauvinistic nationalism.” This vision sidelines individual freedom, prioritizing material equality through authoritarian measures. He concludes, “We need to step up to a new plateau, and that, I submit, must be a plateau that defines a new eupraxophy that is relevant to the human condition, can inspire human beings to commitment and action, and provide meaning to their lives. This task is all the more pressing given the apparent collapse of Marxism, and the great vacuum in the world for inspiring ideals. Unless an authentic, democratic, scientific, and secular humanism can be identified as a viable alternative, then we may again be threatened by a new outburst of orthodox theism, and new cults of irrationality are most likely to emerge to plague humankind.” Kurtz’s term “eupraxophy,” derived from Greek roots meaning “good practice and wisdom,” describes a practical, secular philosophy aimed at guiding conduct and fostering purpose without supernatural beliefs. Marxism, as the second humanist revolution, aimed high but revealed significant flaws.
These insights are drawn from Kurtz’s *Defense of Eupraxophy* (Humanism Today, 1991). He explicitly highlights the close connections among humanism, Marxism, and atheism—not suggesting that every atheist is a Marxist, but that Marxists and socialists generally align with humanist principles. Kurtz expresses regret over Marxism’s practical failures, and as late as 2012, he continued to reframe the ideology that drove the first two humanist revolutions.
A Pervasive Influence: This doctrine remains influential in academia and higher education, where its advocates exert significant impact through legal systems, government, media, and public education, often disproportionate to their numbers. Marxism, as applied humanism, did not disappear with the so-called “Fall of Communism”; it has been rebranded with terms like “social justice,” “environmental justice,” and “liberation theology.” Like many ideologies, it adapts to meet the needs of its proponents.
Opposition to Liberty: At its core—though not necessarily among all its adherents—secular humanism often challenges the principles of the United States and individual liberty. Kurtz’s “eupraxophy” may be a rhetorical shift, but it continues to prioritize state-enforced equality over divinely ordained rights. This perspective underscores the need to recognize those who question the foundations of freedom. This is not a coordinated conspiracy for a new world order, but rather the sincere, yet in my view misguided, commitment of many to a vision that struggles to align with individual liberty.
Humanism’s narrative begins with its clash with America’s foundations, extends through the French Revolution, and culminates in Marxism’s legacy. Revisit the beginning (Part 1) or explore its first revolution (Part 2).
Acknowledgment: I’d like to thank Grok, an AI by xAI, for helping me draft and refine this article. The final edits and perspective are my own.
Quoting Thomas Paine:
I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life. I believe the equality of man, and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.
