Seed-Forms for the Resurrection of the Millennial Left?

Exploring the Conditions of Possibility for Political Resurrection

This February at Philosophy Portal we will be hosting a month-long mediation with Marxist political theorist Chris Cutrone inspired by his book Marxism and Politics. This mediation will involve four sessions. To learn more or to get involved, see: Marxism and Politics.

---

“1917 remains a question [...] whether we ask it explicitly of ourselves now or not. It is the great tabooed subject, even if that taboo has been enforced, either by a mountain of calumny heaped upon it, or the “praise” it earns in Stalinist [...] “adherence”.”¹

“In the aftermath of the Millennial retreat from such encouraging openness, the question is not the potential and hence imperative for the reconstruction of a true Marxist perspective out of the historical wreckage [...] but rather any possible future for doing so that could and should come with new generations of interest in and curiosity about Marxism [...] by the [...] lost children making their ways through the jungle of capitalism.”² 

---

The most fundamental connection between the work of Chris Cutrone and the work of Philosophy Portal can be found in the principle that theory guides political commitments and not the other way around (political commitments guiding theory).³  This is the reason why Philosophy Portal’s logo is the Owl of Minerva, which emphasises the patience of the concept/theory/thinking, for a moment that seems to represent a “time in-between worlds”, a time of radical disorientation, where we actually do not know what to do.  Of course, this stance, as Cutrone notes in our recent discussion on his latest book Marxism and Politics,⁴ could be perceived as a form of “quietism”, as a form of accepting the way things are without trying to change them.  However, perhaps this is the stance that specifically intellectuals need to make as we make a transition from the dominance of neoliberal institutional form to their chronic crisis, where alternative forms of academic life are still emerging and taking shape.  If we put our political commitments before our theoretical work we can easily find ourselves in a situation where we use our theory in an “unearned” form, in a way that causes more political damage than good.⁵  This is a point that I have been embodying in the creation of Philosophy Portal, as inspired by philosopher Slavoj Žižek in regards to the shift from political action back to theory:⁶  

“My advice would be — because I don’t have simple answers —  [...] precisely to start thinking.  Don’t get caught into this pseudo-activist pressure: do something, let’s do it, and so on.  No.  The time is to think.  I even provoked some of my leftist friends when I told them that if the famous Marxist formula was, “Philosophers have only interpreted the world, the time is to change it” [...] that maybe today we should say, “In the twentieth century, we maybe tried to change the world too quickly, the time is to interpret it again, to start thinking.” 

Philosophy Portal works from this standpoint.

Another point of connection between the work of Chris Cutrone and the work of Philosophy Portal can be found in the idea of orbiting a “dark star”⁷ (a metaphor inspired by science fiction).  For Cutrone, that “dark star” represents the potential emergence of a socialist party and Marxist self-consciousness of its true mission and purpose (which we at the sametime need to disentangle from the taboos surrounding the modern history of communism).⁸  The metaphor of the “dark star” is one of the reasons the imagery of the “black hole” is so prominent in Philosophy Portal’s work, as if we must learn to orbit an enormously dense mass, but at the same time struggle with the absence of “light”, “clarity” and “vision”.  In Marxist terms, we are struggling with the absence of a socialist party, we are dealing with the absence of a Marxist self-consciousness of its true mission and purpose.  It is in this precise sense that Cutrone operates from the standpoint of a “dead left”.⁹  Thus, if we are going to consult Cutrone’s The Death of the Millennial Left,¹⁰ we can say that the millennial flirtation with socialism was ultimately undermined by the culture war politicos which transformed a materialist view of history and class analysis into “standpoint epistemology” (the ultimate symptom of this death and failure is perhaps the emergence of a figure like clinical psychologist Jordan B. Peterson to global intellectual superstardom).  

Let us stay with the way in which the millennial left degraded from Marxist class analysis into standpoint epistemology.  Standpoint epistemology emphasises theory from the perspective of your “particular” sex, gender or race standpoint (position).  From the perspective of standpoint epistemology politics is nothing but a theoretical understanding from your particular place/positon (again: sex, gender, race).  This particularist approach obfuscates the opportunity to think of socialism as a universal project because it confuses particularist psychosocial traumas with the real nerve-centre of dialectical materialism.  Thus, arguably one of the underlying reasons why Philosophy Portal as a work emphasises a “Return to Hegel” is that Hegel’s dialectic of being-nothing offers us a philosophical science, a way to think while including particularity into universality without either: 

1. becoming caught in an abstract universal without the real of particularity, or 

2. becoming caught in an abstract particular without real universality¹¹  

We find here another link with Cutrone’s work, insofar as Cutrone emphasises this principle as key for both the history of Marxism, from Lukács to Adorno, whose own philosophies and politics emphasises the “identity of identity and non-identity”.¹²  

The importance of emphasising both Hegel’s dialectic of being-nothing, as well as Lukács and Adorno’s approach to Marxist politics of identity-nonidentity, is that we precisely avoid a standpoint epistemology where particularist identity consciously or unconsciously conceives of itself as “All”, or full-complete, as if just “one’s own experience” (of sex, gender, class) give one a special theoretical insight that “trumps” universality or stands directly for universality.  We see this corrosive ideology precisely as having already destroyed the potential of the millennial left to think about the contradictions that history has presented to it.  As opposed to an epistemological standpoint where we think that our particular view of sex, gender, and race represents universality, we should, following philosopher Mladen Dolar, note the “blind spot” and “disturbance” of particularity and its voice.¹³  Namely, when we assume that the meaning of the voice of historical particularity can be found in its clear message or its aesthetic beauty (say for the sublation of capitalism in a socialist order); we forget about the uncanny voice that is not-one with the word, and that precisely represents particularities’ truth as something revealing its own nothingness.¹⁴  This is why the proper Marxist response to “Black Lives Matter” is not the reactionary “All Lives Matter”, but rather “No Lives Matter” (not in the sense of reinforcing imagery of Stalinist gulags, but in the sense of working directly with the uncanny/disturbing emptiness of your particular identity towards true universal becoming).  

Here I argue that the millennial left has fallen unreflexively into the particularity of this uncanny dimension of the voice (mostly in screaming and babbling), and its universal beautiful message is fraudulent (as perhaps revealed by the populist right).  Thus, on the first two levels, of the clear message and aesthetic beauty, the millennial left forgets/is unconscious of, this uncanny voice and thinks that the clarity of its message and its aesthetic beauty can be directly affirmed.  However, this is obviously the cry of Hegel’s “beautiful soul” which sets up its clear beauty in a dualism with the horrible messiness of the world, a potential mistake that we see emerging on the populist right in identification with narratives of Orthodox Christianity.  But the truth of the millennial left, and what it cannot escape and must reflect now, is the uncanny dimension where its words fail, where word/signifier and voice do not coincide.  In short, the millennial left turned psychotically against the word and the signifier, against intersubjectivity and the law.  Perhaps this is why we are today swinging in the culture wars through a form of conservative counter-culture which seeks to reintroduce the transcendental signifier and the law (binding the voice back to the word), against the obscene and uncanny excess of the unreflexive millennial left and its standpoint epistemology.  

Here the millennial left has a choice: 

1. It can recognise that its truth is not in its beautiful message for a socialist politics and fall into this conservative counter-cultural swing which collapses voice into word, or 

2. It can reflect on its truth as the voice representing the uncanny excess of sex, gender, and race itself  

While this uncanny excess cannot be signified logically or translated directly into a real universal politics, remaining particularist, even infantile, in its structure; it is at the same time true that infants are destined to grow, seeds in the right soil can flower.  Moreover, the conservative counter-culture itself totally avoids the truth that we can find in the uncanny excess of sex, gender, race and class.  Consider that in Trump’s inaugural Presidential address he stated that “there are only two genders: male and female”, unproblematically closing the gap between sex (male/female) and gender (man/woman) where we must reflect on the uncanny dimension of the voice.  Here I would double down and state this is one of the reasons why those burned out by the death of the millennial left should dig into Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit.  That is anyway what I ended up doing.  

What Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit can help with, as a preparation for learning the logical foundations for both the philosophical sciences and scientific socialism, is precisely working through the nothingness/non-identity of one’s particularity towards the standpoint of the becoming-other of particularity in universality (Absolute Spirit/God) as such.  This necessarily lends itself to a more robust Marxist self-consciousness in the sense that, after Kant and Hegel, we can no longer conceive of metaphysics in its traditionalist sense, but must conceive of traditionalist metaphysics as a metaphor for society itself.  In other words, in Marxism we are faced with the challenge of a concrete sociology, which is why Marxist politics shifts our attention to the real of political-economy as universal (over sex, gender, race), and specifically in our era, political-economy dominated by capitalism (commodity form, M-C-M’).¹⁵  If postmodern philosophy reads Hegelo-Marxism as an absolutist tyranny inevitably leading to something like Stalinist terror, the Hegelo-Marxist tradition may read postmodern philosophy as the uncanny empty voice of particularity that must be situated within a materialist class analysis in order to grow a new world.    

Here we approach a crucial aspect of Cutrone’s emphasis on returning to the Marxist theory-practice between, specifically 1848-1917.  What we find in-between 1848 and 1917 is the failed social democratic revolutions within the newly emergent Industrial-capitalist system, and the Russian Revolution, which perhaps naively attempted to orchestrate the genesis of a world revolution.¹⁶  He suggests that we must focus on specifically this period because it is subject to immense “thought-taboos”.¹⁷  In short, in the genesis of Marxism to its failed practical implementation we find thought-taboos oriented around the emergence of a universal perspective focused on a central social contradiction (independent of standpoint epistemology): a society reproduced and perpetuated by capital domination under commodity forms.¹⁸  Thus, from the Marxist vantage point of 1848, the various sexual, gendered, and race-based ideologies are in principle united towards the work of this sociohistorical contradiction of our being and consciousness.  

However, we must also emphasize the results of Marxist theory issuing from the historical contradictions of 1848’s failed revolutions for social democracy with Lenin’s attempts in 1917 to work through the contradictions of bourgeois society concretely.  Cutrone notes that Marxism works within liberal capitalist democracy immanently, on the terms of the contradictions of its own value system, towards the beyond, or more properly, the sublation of liberalism.¹⁹  This is needed more than ever today because liberal capitalist democracy repetitively fails to come to terms with its own contradictions, which often leads to an unreflexive post-humanist/transhumanist ideology, on the one hand, or a regressive theocratic communitarianism, on the other hand, precisely in the absence of access to the Marxist tradition proper.²⁰  The stakes of engaging Cutrone's work here is to give us insight into how we might think the actual fulfillment of liberalism through communism as itself a vanishing principle for our species-being’s becoming-other to itself.²¹  

Consequently, and to summarise, what is lost in not having access to this specific period between 1848-1917, is the capacity to work through the contradiction of bourgeois values on its own terms, to its sublation.  What appears in a distorted pseudo-Marxist form is both a “progressive” left wedded to standpoint epistemology, as well as a bourgeois ideology that falls in love, not with the reification of bourgeois values, but either the idea of the beyond as post-humanity (e.g. Silicon Valley as orbiting transhuman futures), or a return to a pre-liberal religious community (e.g. current return to religion moment in our culture).  In short, if we are unable to imagine a bourgeois society that works through the self-contradictions of its own ideology we avoid Cutrone’s aforementioned “dark star” (a socialist party and Marxist self-consciousness of its true mission and purpose).²² 

In Cutrone’s work, he makes a hard cut between ancient and modern freedom, with ancient freedom oriented around “being” and modern freedom oriented around “becoming” (which is represented by the aforementioned Hegelian logic of being-nothing, or identity/non-identity).  However, this Hegelian notion of freedom as becoming has to be thought on the Marxist level of a society reproduced and perpetuated by capital domination under commodity forms (M-C-M’).  In other words, our being and consciousness as a modern society is a form of becoming reproduced and perpetuated by capital domination under commodity forms, which both opens up new forms of freedom and new forms of slavery (a new master/slave dialectic).  To sublate liberalism for some sort of vanishing principle called communism involves thinking of the actuality of this contradiction and the potentialities therein (without falling into the aforementioned regressive illiberal stance, or a posthuman stance).  As a structuring principle for thinking this, we have to zero-in on the Marxist formula for capitalist society:²³ 

M-C-M’ standing for “Money” - “Commodity” - “More Money”.  

With this formula we get the basic mechanics of modern capitalist society, and both the freedom it opens, as well as the new slavery that it perpetuates.  The mechanism involves a universal language (money), an object of social mediation (commodity), and a result/output for an endless/spurious growth (more money).  In short, if you use money as a universal language to invest in a commodity that is capable of social mediation you enter into an endless/spurious growth of capital process.  The problem is of course that this process is not capable of universally lifting all members of society but rather creates radical inequalities that ultimately lead to an unfree society as a total structure.  Cutrone notes that while some people do of course benefit from capitalism, we should not confuse “successful capitalist” with “freedom”, as everyone in capitalist society ultimately becomes a means to the end of serving capital.  

To demonstrate how this formula represents a central social contradiction that we need to think through we can juxtapose it with the aforementioned threats to falling into a regressive illiberal stance or a posthuman stance.  For the regressive illiberal stance we often find a form of theological communitarianism or a political authoritarianism as a way to deal with the short-circuiting or limiting of the M-C-M’ mechanism, which is presumably experienced as alienating.  In the contemporary movement towards establishing new Christian communities we can say that there is a replacement of M-C-M’ mechanism with a non-dialectical and literal understanding of the trinity as capable of a new form of social mediation.  Here “God” replaces “money”, “Christ” replaces “commodity”, and the Holy Spirit replaces “more money”.²⁴  What this move represses or refuses to think is the way that the emergence of capitalism was already mediated by Christianity, and M-C-M’ is quite literally the new self-appearance of God in history (Giorgio Agamben’s “God didn’t die he was turned into money”).²⁵  While I will expand on this more below, this means that global atheist society already relates to God through the universal language of money, Christ through the commodity-form, and Holy Spirit through the endless expansion of money itself.²⁶

In contrast, for the posthuman stance, we usually find a subject who finds the mechanism of M-C-M’ (more or less) inherently liberating in a non-contradictory form, and downplays the way in which this mechanism creates an unfree society.  What is often connected to the posthuman stance is the idea that capitalism and its invisible hand will self-organise human society towards the beyond of the human condition, whether in the form of machine uploading of consciousness, or some other combination of trans/post-human technologies to undermine the social reproduction of the human form.  In this situation M-C-M’ is contradicted, not through self-reflection on the contradictory values of bourgeois society towards a more socialist world, but rather through bourgeois society itself becoming post-human (and thus escaping the problem of socialism entirely).  We might say that God/money in this situation becomes the machine itself (e.g. machine uploading), Christ/commodity in this situation becomes the self-conscious uploading transcending the body, and Holy Spirit/more money becomes the endless/infinite growth of spirit itself beyond biology for some new technologically mediated evolutionary process.²⁷

In this work we are going to assume that a return to traditional Christian community and a transcendence to a posthuman reality are both symptoms of the universality of the contradiction of living in a society reproduced and perpetuated by capital domination under commodity forms.  Moreover, these ideologies are symptoms of the absence of access to the Marxist tradition which would be capable of informing a subjectivity capable of working towards a socialist party of its true mission and purpose of sublating liberalism for communism as a vanishing mediator.  What this would involve is both the recognition that the traditional Christian community has already been embedded into a secular capitalist world, and the posthuman bourgeois fantasy as avoiding self-reflection on the contradictory value system of that same secular capitalist world.  What we find in-between both of these traps is the possibility of thinking with and beyond the formula of M-C-M’ at the same time, with the beyond representing not a post-human reality, but a more human (that is a socialist) reality.          

So how is that work to be done?  That is not a million or a billion dollar question, but rather a question that asks us to transform the quantitative accumulation of capital into a new quality.  In terms of how I am trying to think (and act), this involves working directly with M-C-M’, but also and simultaneously trying to undermine it for something social.  In other words, the formula of “M-C” can be used to build up a process of social mediation, but then the formula “C-M’” must be short-circuited or limited towards some new form of socialisation process or creation of new social conditions of possibility (as opposed to the fetishisation of endless capital accumulation).  This is difficult because building “M-C” is difficult and then the temptation is to “fall” into the “reward” of “C-M’” as opposed to short-circuiting or limiting “C-M’” for some new process of social mediation.  But at the same time, it is not impossible to do this in a way that is both sincere and avoids cynicism.  What it requires is a perspective shift on the very mechanism of desire that leads to the accumulation itself, towards a drive that is enjoyed in and for the social process itself (inclusive of all the messiness of being human).  Both the regressive Christian community and the bourgeois post-humanism fail in this regard. 

This brings us to Cutrone’s assertion that Hegelo-Marxism is a key to thinking here which our culture in general disregards or misinterprets.  Consider, for example, the way American author James Lindsay creates a scapegoat strawman out of Hegelo-Marxism as a type of gnostic demonic ideology leading to woke culture (as opposed to understanding the dialectical inversions of Hegelo-Marxism and postmodern philosophy).  One thing is for sure: Hegel is not a gnostic emphasising an escape from the body and the world into the spiritual mind, and his notion of Absolute Knowing should not be confused with the early Christian personal knowledge perceived to be above both proto-Orthodox teachings, and the authority of religious institutions.  However, Hegel and his dialectic of Absolute Knowing is thoroughly mystical, following the work of Jakob Böhme, insofar as he is emphasising a process of freedom through concrete appearances.  What Marx adds to this picture is not so much the correction of a Hegelian error, but rather thinking of a different problem in the concrete world unique to his time: freedom of spirit had become confused with freedom of capital.  In short, and against Lindsay, it is not that Hegelo-Marxism is demonic, it is that Hegelo-Marxism became tasked with overcoming the demonic force of secular capitalism (confusing spiritual social freedom with capitalist freedom), by working with it directly, and sublating it for an immanent socialist beyond.  In this way, Cutrone thinks that Marx does not turn Hegel on his head, but rather keeps his feet on the ground in the inverted world of capital.²⁸

One thing that needs to be further disentangled here is the underutilised or misrecognized potential connection between Hegelo-Marxists and contemporary Christians.  What unifies both is the problem of modern secular capitalism, but where they differ is in their interpretation of history as well as the proper response to our current condition.  We might suggest, following Cutrone, that what explodes here is the difference in thinking of freedom in an ancient framework of being, versus a modern framework of becoming.  Whereas contemporary Christians tend towards the idea that secular modern capitalism is demonic and return to a illiberal pre-modern form of community organising; the Hegelo-Marxist tradition would tend towards the idea that secular modern capitalism is demonic, and we must work directly with this demonic dimension, in order to transcend it.  There is a way in which this latter approach in Hegelo-Marxism is very synergistic with a form of radical theology that, following Thomas Altizer, recognises both the Death of the (traditional notion of) God, as well as recognises the weight/density and challenge of the revolutionary Christ who is present and alive in our midst today, embodied in every human face.²⁹  

If we are to think about this underlying theology in the context of Cutrone’s Marxism, we may find a key to the “resurrection” of the millennial left.  Cutrone declared the left dead in 2006 under the presupposition that the left had become the right in succumbing to positive identification and affirmation of the non-dialectical status quo.  In many ways, and for Cutrone, it is easier to be right-wing than left-wing in the sense that the right identifies positively with existing substance and treats the self-overcoming of what is as both undesirable and impossible.  To be left-wing requires dialectical thinking about the negativities and contradictions of what is towards something that appears impossible on the level of concrete appearances, but which is immanent and necessary on the terms of freedom of social history.  However, if we are thinking about the unity between contemporary Christian communities and Hegelo-Marxism, what we are thinking about involves the radical theology of both the Death of God and the revolutionary Christ, which gives body and foundation to precisely the working with negativities and contradictions of the living social body towards a more socialist understanding of freedom in history.   

To bring things full circle, this link between Christian Atheism and Hegelo-Marxism is central to avoiding the starting points of this article: political commitments that lead theory as opposed to theory leading political commitments, and learning how to orbit the dark star of a socialist party and Marxist self-consciousness of its true mission and purpose.  The millennial left died because it burned out on its own political commitments severed from its own repressed theological core; and the millennial left died because it no longer has access to the Marxist political project between 1848-1917.  At Philosophy Portal we have been attempting to re-establish the conditions of possibility for a left to reconnect with its theological foundations in Christian Atheism; and next month at The Portal we are attempting re-establish the conditions of possibility for the left to reconnect with the Marxist political project of 1848-1917.  The first work is deeply indebted to the philosophy Slavoj Žižek and the theology of Peter Rollins; the second work is likely to become deeply indebted to the political science of Chris Cutrone.  

Marxism and Politics starts February 2nd, see: Marxism and Politics.

1. Cutrone, C. 2024. 1917. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. 21.

2. Cutrone, C. 2024. Foreword. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. ix-x.

3. Ibid. p. viii.

4. WHAT IS SOCIETY FOR MARXISM? (w/ Chris Cutrone). Philosophy Portal. https://youtu.be/ff_HfBjRXqk?si=lGtsTWFqwATE2qyr (accessed: January 31 2025).

5. Cutrone notes this precise point in a recent discussion with Marxist political theorist Daniel Tutt, see: Debating Marxism - Daniel Tutt vs. Chris Cutrone. Emancipations with Daniel Tutt. https://youtu.be/vQzU2IAR8zU?si=oicfBLklSNDCnkrC (accessed: January 31 2025).

6. Slavoj Žižek: Don't Act. Just Think. | Big Think.  Big Think. https://youtu.be/IgR6uaVqWsQ?si=RTc_bduThQUUVmh6 (accessed: January 31 2025).

7. Cutrone, C. 2024. Foreword. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. viii-ix.

8. Ibid.

9. To again reference Cutrone’s recent discussion with Marxist political theorist Daniel Tutt, Cutrone responds in relation to the claim that he is trying to “kill” the left, that you “cannot kill something that is dead”, see: Debating Marxism - Daniel Tutt vs. Chris Cutrone. Emancipations with Daniel Tutt. https://youtu.be/vQzU2IAR8zU?si=oicfBLklSNDCnkrC (accessed: January 31 2025). 

10. Cutrone, C. 2023. Death of the Millennial Left: Interventions 2006-2022. Sublation Media.

11. This dimension of “singular-universality” is the key behind our anthology: Garner, D. & Last, C. 2023. Logic for the Global Brain: Singular Universality as Perfect Opposition. Philosophy Portal Books.

12. Cutrone, C. 2024. Adorno’s Leninism. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. 166.

13. Dimitri Crooijmans centres this reading of Dolar at the opening of the Slovenian School Reading Group at Philosophy Portal, see: https://philosophyportal.online/slovenian-school-reading-group (accessed: January 31 2025).

14. Dolar, M. 2006. A Voice and Nothing More. The MIT Press. p. 7-8.

15. Cutrone, C. 2024. Preamble. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. 2.

16. Ibid. p. 1-2.

17. Cutrone, C. 2024. Foreword. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. ix.

18. Cutrone, C. 2024. Preamble. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. 2.

19. Cutrone, C. 2024. 1917. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. 26.

20. These tensions are at the core of my doctoral thesis, see: Last, C. 2020. Global Brain Singularity: Universal History, Future Evolution, and Humanity’s Dialectical Horizon. Springer.

21. Cutrone, C. 2024. 1917. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. 18.

22. Cutrone, C. 2024. Foreword. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. viii-ix.

23. Cutrone, C. 2024. Prologue. In: Marxism and Politics: Essays on Political Theory and the Party 2006-2024. Sublation Press. p. 10.

24. It should also be noted that the left orienting “standpoint epistemology” represents its own form of “illiberal mediation” in regards to centring the particularity of sex, gender, and race.

25. Sava, P. 2014. God didn’t die he was transformed into money" - An interview with Giorgio Agamben - Peppe Savà. libcom.org.  https://libcom.org/article/god-didnt-die-he-was-transformed-money-interview-giorgio-agamben-peppe-sava (accessed: January 31 2025).

26. I massively expand on this idea as central to the Christian Atheism course, see: https://philosophyportal.online/christian-atheism (accessed: January 31 2025).

27. Perhaps the best example of this ideology: Kurwzeil, R. 2005. The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. Penguin.

28. WHAT IS SOCIETY FOR MARXISM? (w/ Chris Cutrone). Philosophy Portal. https://youtu.be/ff_HfBjRXqk?si=lGtsTWFqwATE2qyr (accessed: January 31 2025).

29. Altizer, T. 1966. The Gospel of Christian Atheism. Westminster Press.