This is the final part of a long article, tracing some of the developments of the trend of political thinking originated by Karl Marx and its contradictory continuation by his followers – the ‘Marxists! As we saw in Part 4, the dualistic conceptual framing by Marx of one extremely subjective species (humanity) treating all other species as objects (instruments) of production and satisfaction by exploitation and extinction, mirrors the fact, if not the motive, of successive hierarchical mass society elites. In their treatment of working people and other species of life on earth, they treated everything except their own class as objects (instruments) of production (sources of surplus labour) to be exploited by extracting surplus product and accumulating surplus value and wealth from their enforced exertions. Marx, clearly wanted that exploitation of humanity to end, but by what means and for what ends, we shall see.

Characterising life on earth in this dualistic anthropocentric ‘us and them’ way, as the many quotations from Marx have indicated, clearly iestablishes the fact that he was operating from within a commonly held 19th century anthropocentric focused intellectual tradition. It was a tradition which had long been universal and as such had been comprehensively incorporated into the various ancient monotheistic religions and philosophies. The originators of these religious traditions had done so by asserting that their Abrahamic god had created the first human and then created all the other forms of life for mankind to utilise as they saw fit. In doing so they had merely recorded what many or even most humans at the time chose to believe. That belief continued even though, as a universal trend, that universality had been fragmented into differing and aggressively competing political, national, religious and ethnic socially aggregated communities.

However, by the 21st century, it had long been known that the human species is a single species and since the 20th century, it has been known that the Homo sapien species is an integrated and inter-dependent part of the biological matrix of life on earth. Yet, as previously noted, the continued use of the ‘common sense’ abstraction ‘nature’, has routinely and problematically obscured the detail and inter-dependence of the multi-species biosphere. This habit has allowed the living reciprocal, inter-dependent matrix of life on earth, to be problematically marginalised and even ignored. So, although Marx, and probably every 19th century gardener of any reasonable ability, would have known that good soil needs manure and decomposing organic material, to be optimally useful as a growing medium, the exact interdependent biological and cellular activity along with its universal microscopic Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic structures would have been unknown. So there can be no real surprise when Marx in the 19th century again asserted;

“The earth itself, is an instrument of labour, but when used as such in agriculture implies a whole series of other instruments and a comparatively high development of labour.” (Capital Volume 1.)

Consequently viewing the earth as an instrument of labour and seeing the planet (and soil) as something seperate from the life-cycle of the human species and consequently viewing human labour as another thing, is to be expected However, it also means Marx and to a certain extent, the ‘Marxists’ cannot be relied upon to bring accuracy or clarity to the existential threats facing life on earth. in reality, both the above abstractions are part of the same planetary biological metabolic processes. It would be more accurate to say that labour, as effort (i.e. the biological multi-cellular effort of species, exerted in order to obtain their (N-M-G-R+ A-D) life-cycle needs is a function of the bio-chemical composition of nature as a whole. Although using the abstraction ‘nature’ would still serve to obscure the complex interconnected reality of life on earth. We should note here that from within the limited 18th and 19th century understandings of life on earth that whilst the earth itself (the planet and its biosphere) was reasonably well understood as solar system of remotely interconnected objects; the fact that on earth’s surface millions of self-replicating, inter-dependent biological systems and sub systems, had evolved, was not.

That the planets surface liquids, gases, minerals, molecules and proteins had somehow combined to become self-replicating, biologically based, ecologically integrated, and inter-dependent organisms within a holistic planetary system, was not even an untested hypothesis, let alone being close to a theory. Science was still being constrained within and distorted by, religious and secular forms of dogmatic certainty. So all the known species were then treated as God (or nature) created separate, independent living entities, some of which just happened to eat each other. When in reality and later revealed as probable fact, life on earth in all its diverse forms, is one biological system in which the earth–bound organic entities are not only entirely dependent upon each other for nutrition (N), but are also dependent upon the inorganic minerals, gases and radiant energy of the beyond-earth solar system.

Although some aspects of this inter-dependence, at a basic level, was known in general, detailed knowledge was limited and so could not be considered in sufficient detail to arrive at any alternative interpretations. What had been handed down by previous generations continued to be handed down. To classify, as Marx did, this complex integrated matrix of organic species and internal and external inorganic material inputs and outputs as an instrument of the labour of one of its most recent species – humanity – was in retrospect a form of secular anthropocentrism writ large. By means of this ideological framework, the entire earth was being viewed (and still is by those who still subscribe to this underdeveloped, distorted, anthropocentric way of viewing life on earth), as a ‘possession’ of’ and ‘instrument” of, the human species.

No species of life even posses their own power of animation, for more than a relatively short time, let alone possess a planets resources. Such lingering ancient imaginary intellectual separations of humanity and nature, also clings on in the 20th century and was manifested in the 20th century fantasies that humans could colonise, possess other planets and transplant some resticted form of nature onto them (i.e. terraform them) in order to sustain the large number transported human colonists, needed for a sustainable gene pool. This illusion or naive delusion ignores the fact that it was the complex billion year evolved bio-chemistry (biology) of integrated species (‘nature’) on earth, that eventually produced a viable hominid species now known as humanity! This mixture of arrogance and ignorance was not seen as a problematic characteristic by the 20th century and current 21st century stock of star trek dreamers. The idea that humanity can eventually sufficiently replicate the biological complexity of life on earth (nature) on another planet when the current Homo Sapien species cannot even prevent the continued extinction and degradation of parts of its essential biological species here on the relative stable platform of earth, is fatuous.

Yet the long 5,000 plus year history of anthropocentric practices and intellectual assumptions have repeatedly inverted the actual relationship between biology in general life on earth in general and the particular sociological form of one biological species (humans) out of the millions of inter-dependent biological species. Some among the human species have replaced the bizarre notion of a superior, invisible, all powerful creator God, with the less bizarre, but equally naive idea, that human scientific knowledge and technical abilities can send enough of them to sufficiently populate and replicate what their imaginary ‘god’ created in seven days or what Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic multi-cellular combinations took millions and billions of years of evolution to ultimately establish. The whole imaginary concept of star trek fantasies really is a regression to a pre-adult stage of human wish fulfilment.

The reality, is that the soil, which in Part 3 of this series, Marx was quoted as thinking was independent of humanity, was initially an inorganic compound of various ground up solid materials, which over billions of yearly planetary orbits, eventually also became the recipient of dead and decaying earlier life forms, which therefore added, organic materials to the mineral materials which had been reduced by weather actions into a relatively fine particle top layer. This fine top layer over millions, if not billions of years then became habitat for and organic nutrient source for, micro organisms, plants and fungi. The life processes of these organisms all added and mixed further organic materials to the original proto soil by their living activities and post-death decompositions. Furthermore, animals including human animals before flushing toilets were invented have always defocated upon and disposed of food waste upon soils, enriching the soils fertility and then plants, insects, animals and humans have fed upon the plants and roots which grew in the soil they have jointly fertilised.

If we care to think of it, before hominids evolved into Homo sapiens, before Homo Sapiens became agriculuralists, and before agricultural means of production became industrial means of production ‘nature’ was a self-replicating biological recycling, mutually dependent, dynamically balanced multi-species system of life on earth. For multiple millions of years nature and the millions of species co-existed with nothing remotely resembling mass producing industries. Thus the initial surface soils became in turn the habitat and nutrition source for an additional layer of larger plants, insects and animals, both surface and burrowing, all adding even more variety and organic richness to its composition. Yet with his focus of research almost exclusively fixed upon the social developments of capitalistically organised humanity, Marx drew the following anthropocentric and dualistic conclusions.

“The labour-process resolved as above into it’s simple elementary factors, is human action with a view to the production of use-values, appropriation of natural substances to human requirements; it is a necessary condition for effecting exchange of matter between man and Nature; it is the everlasting Nature imposed condition of human existence and therefore is independent of every social phase of that existence, or rather, is common to every such phase. It was therefore, not necessary, to represent our labourer in connection with other labourers; man and his labour on one side, Nature and its materials on the other, was sufficient. (ibid. Emphasis added RR.)

Man and his labour on one side Nature and its materials on the other, is an anthropocentric dualistic conception. For it is a fact that, prior to the capitalist mode of production, there were other modes which effected the exchange of matter between humanity and nature. Nevertheless, its 19th century capitalistic mode, Marx considered that latest human mode of production was a necessary condition for the exchange of matter between man and Nature’. So despite Marx’s excellent description of the human ‘estrangement’ from its species essence, by the class and occupation divisions within the capitalist dominated hierarchical mass societies, he (along with his contemporaries), remained trapped within the anthropocentric intellectual bubble created by prior hierarchical mass society assumptions.

These were theoretical assumptions which asserted a crucial division between biological nature and one of its evolutionary offsprings – socialised humanity. It is important to remember that this dualistic anthropocentric formulation is no isolated assertion by Marx or Engels. And of course, even the use of terms such ‘sides’ are concepts derived from describing geometrical shapes, not derived from description of biological organisms. There are no ‘sides’ in biological shapes and processes, or straight lines in nature, those are sociological constructs limited to human sociologically based intellectual based imagination and assumptions. Biological and astronomic systems involve only inorganic and organic materials, interacting and merging devoid of number, geometric shape, linear distance or specific time periods.

The reality of life on earth is that the organic material of life on earth (i.e. the biological system of life on earth) is both determined and dominated by the inorganic material of the entire planetary system. The fluctuating temperatures, the climate patterns, the seasonal fluctuations, the solar energy pulses supplied to the planet earth, are what organic life depends upon and these variable inputs presuppose the existence of the wider solar system and galaxy, of which it is a part. In turn the existence of the human species is also determined and dominated by the biological sphere of life on earth (the oxygen, the photosynthetic species and the species used as nutrition), not human measurements of time or human measurements of distance. We humans need to get over ourselves and realise that the human species is not the prime concern or beneficiary of the solar system.

The human species, in a sequential sense, is a third existentially dependent biological part of the total galactic system and not the first or primary existential part of the entire system. The first primary realm being, the Inorganic realm of the galaxy, the second inorganic realm being the solar system, the the third realm being the organic realm of the earth’s biosphere, and the fourth realm being the sociological and related intellectual realm of humanity. Or, 1. The physical realms, 2, The biological realm, and 3, The sociological realm of humanity.

Anthropocentric based ideologies both secular and religious have reversed or inverted the natural sequence and evolution of the universe, as depicted above, into the opposite sequence. With anthropocentric focussed intellectual constructs, the hierarchical sequence is 1, the human realm is viewed as the primary and dominant one. 2, the biological realm is viewed as a subordinate realm and 3, the astro-physical inorganic realm is viewed as being the next realm to be conquered and subordinated by elite humanity. Since the anthropocentric ideological constructed intellectual bubble thinks this ideological inversion of reality is the actually reality, its human personifications have consequently acted and continue to act upon their own inverted perspective of reality.

Elites within the bourgeois era have perfected that intellectual bifurcation of life on earth. They have sought to conquer, dominate and exploit humanity, and to conquer, dominate and exploit the planets biosphere, and are now seeking to conquer and dominate parts of the solar system. They have used their power and wealth accumulated from the exploitation and dehumanisation of the bulk of their citizens, to insist that the true essence of the human species is conquer, possess and exploit everything that has so far not been conquered, possessed and exploited. In doing so they have turned their dehumanised subjects into consumers, of objects and experiences, which have to be paid for and the production of which is steadily eating away and destroying the biosphere foundations which support all forms of life on earth.

But the actual non-virtual reality is that everything physical (and emotional) depends upon the stability and continuity of the existing relatively stable solar system, everything biological depends upon the stability and continuity of the earths rotational system and existing intensity of solar radiation; everything sociological depends upon the stabilty and continuity of the inter-dependent biological species system, within the total species biosphere. The focus on the simple elementary abstract factors of human labour processes by Marx, and most of his followers, signals that this was a consistent and exclusively anthropocentric paradigm of thinking that Marx and everyone else were mired in during that earlier period. And of course, the anthropocentric paradigm is a cultural habit of thinking that many people are still hopelessly mired in.

For example, simply curbing climate changes by achieving clean air and 100% electrical power, as some superficial thinkers imagine cannot and will not slow down production in general or production in particular industries. Production to satisfy the needs, demands and expectations of the members of global hierarchical mass societies, particularly the resource consuming appetites of the elites, will still require the frequent extraction and consumption of far more organic resources than can be regrown fast enough to satisfy demand, or alternatives discovered.

Because, whatever the source of energy used for production, the relationship between existing hierarchical mass society communities and nature requires that multiple organic species be extracted, processed, consumed, and waste materials to be dumped or further processed. Whatever the source of energy, food, clothing, housing, vehicles, many consumer goods and entertainment materials are made by mass extracting processing and directly or indirectly consuming inorganic materials and of course many of the organic species that are actually essential for a balanced biosphere.

It should be an obvious fact that an entire forest with its plant, insect and animal residents with their continual activities of recycling of debris, gases and nutrients, which took hundreds of years to mature, can be be cut down in a year or less using electrical chain saws and tracked electric vehicles. Even if forests are replanted (which currently is not always the case), it would take more centuries before new forest plantations were again absorbing a similar amount of carbon and nitrogen and delivering similar amounts of nutrition to its future inhabitants and oxygen to the atmosphere. Therefore the ending of all hierarchies and all elite privilege in wealth and power is a necessary first step in beginning to solve the current ecological and climatic imbalance.

Consequently, the growing ecological crisis on planet earth, is about far more than energy and climate, and its solution is about far more than the anti-capitalism of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky and Mao’setung. The evaluative phrase Marx uses, that ‘man and his labour on one side, Nature and its materials on the other, was sufficient’, for his purposes, confirms that this 19th century dualistic limitation, extended across all classes. And with regard to such excessive extractions of natural resources, by the ever increasing productivity of the productive forces of humanity, Marx in the 19th century also saw only positive potentials. For example, he reasoned that;

“The means – unconditional development of the productive forces of society – comes continually into conflict with the limited purpose, the self-expansion of the existing capital. The capitalist mode of production is, for this reason, a historical means of developing the material forces of production and creating an appropriate world market…” (Marx. Capital Vol 3 page 244/245. Emphasis added. RR.)

In other words whilst Marx at that 19th century stage of understanding was analysing the ever increasing productivity of profit driven commodity production and its relative overproduction, he was not even remotely considering the probability of an absolute overproduction and its consequent undermining of the inter-connected and inter-dependent biological reproductive rhythms of life on earth in general or life – as a whole. He had simply considered that removing the profit motive would allow the “unconditional development of the forces of production” – by socialised humanity. Such views were not confined to Marx, but as we have indicated previously, it extended to Engels and beyond, and as far removed as Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky and other Bolsheviks. For example Engels in his book AntiDurhing asserted that the class structures of hierarchical mass societies were “based on the insufficiency of production” but when workers take over control of production, he asserted, they will expand it; and therefore the following will occur;

“The expansive force of the means of production bursts asunder the the bonds imposed upon them by the capitalist mode of production. Their release from these bonds is the sole prerequisite for an unbroken, ever more rapidly advancing development of the productive forces, and thus of a practically unlimited growth of production itself….The conditions of existence environing and hitherto dominating humanity now pass under the dominion and control of humanity, which now for the first time becomes the real conscious master of nature…..It is humanity’s leap from the realm of necessity into the realm of freedom……Men, at last masters of their of their own mode of social organisation, consequently become at the same time masters of nature, masters of themselves – free. (Engels. AntiDuhring. Part 3 Socialism. Section 2, Theoretical. Emphasis added RR.).

Note the abstract reference to ‘bonds’ and the breaking of them! Anyone with even an embryonic grasp of the ecological species balance of life on earth along with global pollution, cannot fail to be alarmed by a phrase such as; ‘a practically unlimited growth of production’ and humanity becoming ‘masters of nature’, which the capitalist classes have already tried to achieve, and failed, in their global investment practices.

Of course Engels was not a capitalist, but his anthropocentric assumptions were essentially the same as those of the bourgeoisie and previous historical religious and secular elites. The world (nature included) was there to be used as humanity saw fit. Engels along with Marx envisioned a classless form of humanity, but a humanity organising the unlimited growth of production. Furthermore, the above viewpoint articulated by Engels, was not an individual maverick going off Marx’s message, because Engels was just articulating what Marx, using philosophical language, had articulated almost from the beginning of his theoretical researches. Marx, in 1844 had written some manuscript papers that contained the following.

“Thus society is the complete unity of man with nature, the true resurrection of nature – the accomplished naturalism of man and the accomplished humanism of nature. Industry is the actual, historical relationship of nature and therefore of natural science to man. If therefore industry is conceived as the esoteric revelation of man’s essential powers we also gain an understanding of the human essence of nature or the natural essence of man.” (Marx. 1844 Manuscripts. Volume 3 Marx Engels Collected Works, Volume 3 page 300 -303. Emphasis added. RR.)

It could not be made much clearer than that by Marx. The human essence of nature and the natural essence of mankind is manifested in – industry! Despite his much neglected revolutionary-humanist analysis of human estrangement due the hierarchical mass society form which had been embraced by the capitalist elites and their mode of industrial production, Marx (and others) concluded that once the capitalist class had been overthrown and/or absorbed into the working class and class distinctions eliminated, the following conclusion would be reached; “Thus society is the complete unity of man with nature, the true resurrection of nature”….”Industry is the actual, historical relationship of nature (and therefore of natural science) to man”.

How Marx gets to this line of deduction is revealing. These 1844 manuscripts were notes Marx made for himself as he worked his way through his theoretical approach and for this reason can not be considered definitive. Nevertheless, they do give clues to why Marx, starting off with the estrangement of humanity from it’s natural biological essence can end up with industrial mass producing society as being nature personified. By this point in time, Marx clearly considered the essence of the human species was characterised by what humanity could produce socially using its advanced scientific and technological methods of industrial production.

According to Marx – at his most advanced stage of critical thinking – the human species should not be considered as a late developed and still firmly rooted and still learning part of the biological system of life on earth, but something already superior to it. Instead Marx considers that the human species is an advanced evolutionary outcome of a sophisticated sociological human inspired system of mass production, with all the intended and unintended consequences that such systems entail. Consequently, in considering the question of human dependence or independence and the religious hold of mystical ‘creation’ type reasoning upon ordinary humans Marx wrote;

“The fact that nature and man exist on their own account is incomprehensible to it, (i.e. every day reasoning. RR) because it contradicts everything tangible in practical life.” (ibid vol 3 p 304)

But of course although by denying that nature and man were created by a god, this secular fact does not make either of these categories entirely independent of something else – such as bio-chemical, self-replicating organic systems. It only makes them independent of being created by a non-existent mystical male deity. The fact that species through sexual or asexual biological reproduction produce new copies of themselves also means they are not independent, or that they ‘exist on their own account’ but are dependent upon many other biological human beings, as well as being dependent upon inorganic planetary material and organic material from other species.

So the fact is that man as a biological species and nature being made up of millions of biological species which also biologically reproduce definitely do not exist on their own account, as Marx asserts. Life on earth exists on account of the bio-chemical process of organic and inorganic recycling of life on earth, which is dependent upon the entire evolution of biological species taking place within the whole biosphere of earth. Nor does it mean that the rest of the biological system can be materially or intellectually incorporated as an integral part of the socio-biological system’s of humanity.

So when Marx also concluded in the 1844 manuscripts that in effect; “Human industrialised societies represent the complete unity of man with nature and nature’s true resurrection”, he was declaring what he considered was the essence of the human species, and attempting to establishing that intellectually imagined ‘essence’ – as a logical fact for his and future generations. Furthermore, when he added that;
But since for the socialist man, the entire so-called history of the world is nothing but the creation of man through human labour, nothing but the emergence of nature for man, so he has the visible irrefutable proof of his birth through himself, of his genesis.” (ibid 305)

We can begin to understand that Marx was not able to utilise a bio-chemical explanation of the common evolutionary origin of the Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic cells within life on earth and their internal organelle structures in the evolution of multicellular species, within the plant, insect and animal types of life on earth. In fact nobody could, because this detail and its implications had not been sufficiently revealed and understood, until the late 20th century. Nor was their mutual ecological inter-dependence understood at the time. We can also understand that Marx’s defining of humanity and nature as having a sociological essence, rather than just a sociological form and a biological essence was largely due to a lack of detailed biological knowledge

So in the 21st century we need to differ from Marx substantially, and in addition remind ourselves that defining the essence of the human species, is an ongoing collective task for every generation, not an assertion by any particular individual talented or not. This is because we also know that the human species is capable of self-critical reflection and of changing its practices and its thinking as accurate knowledge accumulates, even if not all humans consistently exercise that capability. And that possibility presupposes that the human species collectively ceases to eliminate all the myriad species, which provide an adequately supportive biosphere for life on earth.

To sum up so far: The forensic level of analysis by Marx of the capitalist mode of production is still unsurpassed by any subsequent intellectual or economist. His perceptive development of the ‘estrangement, alienation and dehumanisation symptoms created by living in capital dominated hierarchical mass society forms, remains extremely relevant and pertinent, even though he did not specifically recognise these symptoms have dominated all forms of hierarchical mass societies, from ancient to modern. These symptoms become evident particularly when we consider the histories of past slave based societies, their ancient wars to annex land and resources and the multiple genocides by the empires of Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome. Not forgetting of course the current genocide in Gaza and the West Bank. The forced estrangement, alienation and dehumanisation of the Palestinian people from their homes, their identities and their human rights is beyond question to all but the perpetrators of these crimes.

Marx’s comments upon those three symptoms are particularly relevant when we also consider the revelations surrounding the release of the Epstein photo’s, emails and assorted materials. These pieces of previously mostly hidden but blatently recorded evidence, reveal one section of a modern powerful and dehumanised international elite, savagely exploiting and oppressing any age or any gender of life’s species on earth, they fancy in order to satisfy their insatiable desires.

The same scandal has also revealed another section of the dehumanised elite complicit in denying their own complicity and/or covering up the physical and mental crimes against humanity that have been perpetrated against their dehumanised victims and which they have been aware of. Plus the fact that we should not forget an educated, literate middle class media sector who have actively and persistently turned a wilful blind eye and failed to expose or report upon the things they were turning a blind eye upon.

However, recognising the outstanding or degrading human contributions in one elite dominated area of life on earth, does not mean abandoning a thorough criticism of any other areas of importance. Those who have not as yet grasped that the distinction between the current sociological realm of human existence and the biological realm of nature as articulated by Marx, was wrong, is now revealed as a purely anthropocentric ideologically derived construct, belong to the past, not to a Giaia-centric future.

For modern Marxists, environmentalists, humanists and feminists, it is no longer difficult to uncover convincing, reliable evidence that a crucial biological separation between the human species and all other species does not exist in the real material world. That 19th and 20th century ideological position was a mixture of intellectual ignorance and arrogance. It is also not difficult to understand now that the many forms of prejudice and oppression are not biological symptoms but socio-psychological symptoms of a social system designed by elites to function in that prejudiced, discriminatory and oppressive way. The current sociological system has incentivised individuals to conform to these symptoms by creating and granting various rewards for adopting and acting upon those symptoms, whether in perpetrating them, excusing them, ignoring them, denying them or covering them up.

The current generation of Revolutionary-Humanists need to patiently but consistently call out all those who perpetuate the above noted Giaia blind trend of Anthropocentrism in any of its forms, whether these symptoms issue from conservative, liberal, radical, revolutionary or Marxist, political tendencies. This is because 21st century evidence indicates that whatever form of future such advocates thought they were proposing, they have now become representatives of the past levels of general understanding, not advocates of a sustainable future.

Such dogmatic intellectuals will be compelled by their biological essence to continue to exist in a real inorganic and organic, biological world, which sustains their breathing, their thinking, their eating, their drinking, their procreation, whilst continuing to be seduced by long held habits or by forms of ideological loyalty or dogmatic certainty to continue to think within a virtual anthropocentic focussed world of their own and others socially constructed historical and contemporary imagination.

In their social activism and imagination, they may place the complex one-sided sociological world of hierachical mass societies based on destruction way above the importance of the infinitely more complex biological world of species complexity, continuity, mutual inter-dependence and cooperation. In doing so they may imagine that their sociological realm of elite humanity is going to be able to find a way sustain a future biological realm, here on earth or on another planet, when they have self-indulged themselves in the current ones destruction. However, in the end reality will always replace imagination, even after some of us are no longer here to imagine anything at all.

Roy Ratcliffe (February 2026)