Tag Archives: Marxism

Volume 33 2026

A Radical Buddhist Critique of Labor

1 Comment

Volume 33, 2026

Right Livelihood in an Age of Bullshit Jobs: A Radical Buddhist Critique of Labor

James Mark Shields
Bucknell University

This essay reexamines the Buddhist concept of Right Livelihood (sammā-ājīva) through a critical lens, situating it within contemporary global capitalism. Engaging both Buddhist philosophy and Marxian analysis, I argue that conventional interpretations—focused on ethical employment or meaningful work—overlook the systemic conditions of labor exploitation, environmental harm, and socially conditioned craving (taṇhā) that define late capitalism. Buddhism identifies suffering (dukkha) as rooted in craving, while Marx shows how capitalism institutionalizes endless accumulation, reducing human beings to interchangeable labor power. Both diagnose structural delusion rather than individual moral failure. The essay critiques corporate mindfulness and “conscious capitalism,” showing how these practices domesticate Buddhist ethics, enhancing resilience and productivity while leaving harmful systems intact. Similarly, socially engaged Buddhist frameworks risk complicity when compassion is framed in service of profit rather than structural change. I propose a radical Buddhist approach to labor centered on refusal, reduction of unnecessary work, and collective reorganization of economic life. Drawing on Buddhist sources, Marxian critique, and contemporary post-work proposals—including universal basic income, degrowth, and commons-based practices—I argue that Right Living today entails reclaiming time for ethical cultivation, community, and political participation. Liberation extends beyond mindfulness to the transformation of labor itself, challenging the structural imperatives that reproduce suffering and craving.

Read article

Volume 20 2013

Rethinking Buddhist Materialism

ISSN 1076-9005
Volume 20, 2013

Liberation as Revolutionary Praxis: Rethinking Buddhist Materialism

James Mark Shields
Bucknell University

Although it is only in recent decades that scholars have begun to reconsider and problematize Buddhist conceptions of “freedom” and “agency,” the thought traditions of Asian Buddhism have for many centuries struggled with questions related to the issue of “liberation”—along with its fundamental ontological, epistemological and ethical implications. With the development of Marxist thought in the mid to late nineteenth century, a new paradigm for thinking about freedom in relation to history, identity and social change found its way to Asia, and confronted traditional religious interpretations of freedom as well as competing Western ones. In the past century, several attempts have been made—in India, southeast Asia, China and Japan—to bring together Marxist and Buddhist worldviews, with only moderate success (both at the level of theory and practice). This paper analyzes both the possibilities and problems of a “Buddhist materialism” constructed along Marxian lines, by focusing in particular on Buddhist and Marxist conceptions of “liberation.” By utilizing the theoretical work of “radical Buddhist” Seno’o Girō, I argue that the root of the tension lies with conceptions of selfhood and agency—but that, contrary to expectations, a strong case can be made for convergence between Buddhist and Marxian perspectives on these issues, as both traditions ultimately seek a resolution of existential determination in response to alienation. Along the way, I discuss the work of Marx, Engels, Gramsci, Lukàcs, Sartre, and Richard Rorty in relation to aspects of traditional (particularly East Asian Mahāyāna) Buddhist thought.

Read article