"Out of the oppressed worker, neoliberalism creates the free entrepreneur, the entrepreneur of the self. Today, everyone is a self-exploiting worker in his own enterprise. Everyone is both master and slave. The class struggle has been transformed into an internal struggle against oneself. Those who fail blame themselves and feel ashamed. People see themselves, rather than society, as the problem.”

(Han, Capitalism and the Death Drive)

I've long felt that one of the central myths of capitalism is this idea that anyone can make it. Sort of like living in a hockey town in Canada, everyone knows someone who did, just to make it feel almost accessible. The system is propped up and defended even by those it exploits because they buy into this myth.

I like what Han is saying here: that the neoliberal system has also solidified itself against resistance by making it a struggle against the self. Those who don't 'make it' under capitalism blame something about themselves. They're not working hard enough, they made a bad investment choice, their career just hasn't taken off yet. This is why I think capitalism thrives off our guilt.

That said, as we watch whatever late-stage capitalism is becoming, we can certainly see the way anger is being weaponized against others. This could be the result of rage being commodified and a primary driver in the attention economy. Docility somewhat goes out the window when anger sells so well.

"Every political revolution must be preceded by a revolution of consciousness, one that gives death back to life. The revolution must create an awareness of the fact that life is only truly alive when there is an exchange with death."

From 'Capitalism and the Death Drive', Byung-Chul Han

"Violence is closely connected to the awareness of death, which is exclusively human. The economy of violence is ruled by a logic of accumulation. The more violence you exert, the more powerful you feel. Accumulated killing power produces a feeling of growth, force, power - of invulnerability and immortality. The narcissistic enjoyment human beings take in sadistic violence is based on just this increase in power. Killing protects against death.”

From 'Capitalism and the Death Drive', Byung-Chul Han

"The Christian’s action must be specifically Christian. Christians must never identify themselves with this our that political or economic movement. Rather, they must bring to social movements what they alone can provide." (Ellul, Violence)

Something I've thought about quite a fair amount since shifting to working outside of the church is the question of what role the church might still play in today's social movements. It's something I explored in more detail in this essay looking at how the church can and should support worker's rights. There I suggest that the church needs to first adopt a posture of hospitality (both giving and receiving it) in relation to the rest of society.

We are facing a handful of immense—and interconnected—existential threats. Any hope we have in solving or surviving them requires us working together. They will also call many of us to self-sacrifice on behalf of others and to rely on community. Capitalism will not get us there. It cannot. But within many of our religions, there are truths here we can reclaim. This includes Christianity.

But not a Christianity that is nearly indistinguishable from capitalism. Of that, the church needs to repent.

"In the eyes of many people, love of the poor seems better expressed and incarnated by socialists than by Christians.” (Ellul, Violence)

There was a moment, quite a number of years ago, that signalled a fairly significant change in my life. It was a decision that marked the end of over a decade of working within the structural church. During my time there, I had committed to cultivating a love for others that inspired action—in both myself and those I worked with. Yet I kept bumping up against a tension that I didn't quite know what to do with. It seemed clear that Christianity was well positioned to provide care for individuals suffering from injustice or oppression; but in the face of the economic and social systems that caused that injustice, it felt painfully inadequate.

Now, this is a weighty topic that I'm not about to solve. What I wanted to offer here was a personal reflection around this tension that signalled a change in my life. One that led me from the church into other spaces. It was not a decision that I came to lazily or out of some crisis of faith. If anything, it was driven by idealism. It's also something I am still wrestling with. I claim no definitive answer to these questions.

My goal in reading through Ellul (along with some other authors right now) is to spend some time reflecting on the 21st century (North American) church in light of current events and what seems like a massive betrayal of the faith they claim to hold.