From Bourgeoisie to Proletariat: The Evolution of Bond Villains as Representations of Capitalist Oppression

Marxist Theory Monday #007

Bond and Marx may seem like an unlikely pair, but for Marxist Theory Monday #007, it is an absolute necessity for me to at least attempt to combine the two men into one, beautiful philosophy of sexy, sleek, and relevant communist political theory.

---

The history of all societies can be characterized by a constant conflict between the bourgeoisie, the owners of the means of production, and the proletariat, the working class who labor for them. While James Bond films may seem like an odd subject for a Marxist analysis, upon closer examination, we can see that they offer a fascinating depiction of this ongoing struggle.

Despite the obvious contradiction of Bond being a proletariat hero as well as an agent of the MI6, in the early Bond films, the villains were often portrayed as wealthy and powerful capitalists, using their wealth and influence to exploit those beneath them. In "Goldfinger," the titular villain seeks to control the world's gold supply, increasing his own wealth and power. In "Diamonds are Forever," Blofeld uses his position as a billionaire industrialist to manipulate international politics for his own gain. And in "Die Another Day," Gustav Graves, a wealthy and privileged businessman, uses his advanced technology to further his own agenda. These early villains are embodiments of the bourgeoisie class, representing the oppressive force of capitalism and its exploitation of the working class.

However, as the Bond franchise evolves, we see a shift in the portrayal of the villains. In the later films, the villains become less overtly capitalist, and instead, take on more ambiguous roles. For example, in "Casino Royale," Le Chiffre, the main antagonist, is a banker for terrorist organizations, representing the corrupt and amoral nature of finance, similar to the International Anglo-Industrial Capital Complex (UK, US, Israel, & Qatar).

In these later films, the villains are no longer simply capitalists, but rather they represent a more insidious form of oppression - that of the corrupt and self-interested elite. They use their positions of power and influence for their own gain, at the expense of the working class. This shift in the depiction of villains reflects the changing nature of capitalism in the modern world. Rather than being overtly exploitative, it has become a system that allows those in power to maintain their dominance and suppress the proletariat through more subtle means. It’s all about deception and language-control. They hide their true intentions under the guise of "creating jobs" and "economic growth," while in reality, they are only concerned with increasing their own wealth and maintaining their control.

Moreover, the Bond franchise also serves as a critique of racism at the heart of the flawed philosophy of the West. In many of the films, the villains are representatives of other nations, often portrayed as exotic and foreign, seeking to disrupt the global order and challenge the domination of Western powers. The true villains turn out to be not so far from home.

In conclusion, the evolution of Bond villains from bourgeoisie capitalists to corrupt and self-interested elite reflects the changing nature of capitalism and its ongoing conflict with the working class. It reflects the real-time nature of the ever-evolving geopolitical sphere in which we currently find ourselves.

Thus ends my humble attempt to mesh the two worlds in which I long to live.

Thank you and God bless you,

-M. Shultz for the Shultz Report