Poverty, Despair, and Suicide under Capitalism

 

Is taking one’s own life solely a personal choice? When it becomes widespread, doesn’t it reveal an oppressive system that simultaneously imposes productivity and the fetish of happiness, generating collective suffering? Could there be a class dimension to this?

Suicide manifests as a complex social phenomenon, as an expression of the suffering people are subjected to, especially in relation to class exploitation. It should be noted that:

“[…] the vast majority of men and women who commit suicide are from the working class. Those who commit suicide are not abstract individuals who, at best, are men or women, of a certain age, and living under specific socioeconomic conditions. The reason they are in such conditions is either hidden or simply taken as natural, rather than explained.”

Mental illness is a product of the contradictions of capitalist society, manifesting as anxiety, stress, depression, social phobia, eating disorders, self-harm, insomnia, among other issues. This widespread illness occurs amid a context where much is said about the need to “feel good,” yet the fetish of a happy life—promoted by the ruling class and based on a certain understanding of professional success and a stable family life—not only pressures people to pursue often unrealistic achievements, but also hides the contradictions that lead workers to physical and mental exhaustion, suffering, and illness.

In capitalist society, workers are pressured to maintain or increase productivity while simultaneously being expected to be what is conventionally called “successful” professionals and, at the same time, to have a happy private life. However, even this personal life is under the control of capital, which cannot allow anything to interfere with work productivity. Workers are required to achieve “happiness,” provided it does not compromise the functioning of the economy and the exploitation of labor.

The issue of mental health must be understood as part of the concrete reality of capitalist exploitation. Associating mental health solely with biological factors of isolated individuals excludes its historical and social character. Biological factors that may contribute to illness do not explain themselves; they must be understood in connection with the historical dynamics and contradictions of society. The human life cycle varies across different eras, depending on the material conditions in which one produces one’s existence. It may even have particularities within different social classes in the same society and period, meaning that, ultimately, the mode of production and reproduction of life in society determines the existence of various physical and mental disorders.

In this sense, understanding health and illness requires examining how work and the production of goods are organized and how this impacts people’s lives; this allows comprehension of how people become ill and die across different classes in a given society. In capitalism, the bourgeoisie needs workers capable of producing in their factories; in other words, in the capitalist logic, what determines whether someone is healthy is their ability to work and remain productive. Marx emphasized that capital has “no consideration for the health and longevity of the worker, unless society forces it to.”

In this mode of production, being healthy or not is related to the wear and tear on the workforce. This wear points to factors beyond analyses that focus only on the immediate causes of illness, encompassing the physical and psychological impacts of work in the medium and long term, which affect the life and daily existence of workers. Marx noted that capital:

“[…] usurps time for growth, development, and the healthy maintenance of the body. It steals the time needed for fresh air and sunlight. It encroaches on mealtimes, incorporating them into the production process whenever possible, so that workers, as mere means of production, are fed in the same way that boilers are supplied with coal, and machinery with grease or oil.”

Engels, in his classic study on the condition of the working class in 19th-century England, linked illness to the hardships “to which workers are exposed due to trade fluctuations, unemployment, and miserably low wages in times of crisis.” According to Engels, this situation had severe consequences for workers’ health:

“It frequently happens that, having spent the weekly wages before the week is over, the family is left with insufficient food or just enough to avoid starvation in the final days. Clearly, such a way of life can only give rise to all kinds of diseases; when sickness arrives—when the man whose labor sustains the family, and whose physical activity demands more nourishment, is the first to fall ill—then begins great misery.”

Over the past centuries, capitalism has undergone changes in work organization as responses to its cyclical crises, ensuring continued extraction of surplus value. These organizational forms also impact workers’ daily lives, including exerting control over private life, as in Fordism. In recent decades, the most prominent form of work organization has been so-called Toyotism, characterized by flexible labor that demands greater engagement from the worker in the production process, also affecting their subjectivity.

Faced with physical and mental strain, workers fear being discarded. Their physical and psychological conditions, such as age or chronic illnesses, may threaten job security or the ability to find new employment, risking unemployment. Marx noted that, for capital, “the labor forces removed from the market because they are spent or dead must constantly be replaced, at the very least, by an equal quantity of new labor forces.”

Mental illness can manifest through various symptoms and disorders, related to different forms of work organization. A common condition among workers is depression, associated with discouragement regarding reality and life itself, leading to a loss of will not only to act but even to interact with the surrounding world. Another prevalent mental disorder is anxiety, related to feelings of anguish in which individuals feel powerless against an oppressive reality.

A common element among these symptoms and disorders is stress—a set of reactions to daily challenges, causing nervousness, sadness, apathy, and other effects. The accumulation of such feelings can trigger diverse physiological and psychological responses, leading to exhaustion.

Phenomena such as depression, anxiety, stress, and other forms of illness are interconnected, often not just causing each other but also manifesting as worsening conditions. These are not random occurrences or merely individual problems caused by temporary crises, but products of living within society. Despite these forms of illness, there persists a perception of mental health that “individualizes failure in the form of guilt,” isolating “the political dimension, the objective conditions that attack our ways of life, reshaping work, language, and desire, from psychic suffering.”

Suicide does not escape this simplistic interpretation, with the prevailing notion being that it is a subjective choice or an individual act of will. This perspective echoes Marx’s 1846 critique of utopian socialists on suicide. Marx argued that the number of suicides should “be considered a symptom of the deficient organization of our society,” noting that “during industrial shutdowns and crises, in times of rising costs of living and harsh winters, this symptom is always more evident and takes on an epidemic character.”

One can never be entirely certain of the causes of suicide. Speculation often focuses on immediate triggers that might have driven the person to that extreme. Yet it is rarely possible to fully comprehend the motivations. Because common sense views the suicidal as weak or defenseless, the individual may conceal the depth of their suffering, hiding part of their motivations in a farewell letter or even during psychotherapy.

It is understood that the suicidal person, in some way, loses hope in living in the world. Suicide may seem a misguided choice, as common sense suggests one simply needs to keep fighting and have the will to rise. However, this ignores the material conditions imposed throughout the person’s life. Added to this is a reality where personal relationships are affected by social problems, and therefore passions and dreams often fail to find fulfillment in communal life.

Thus, when someone reaches the point of attempting to take their own life, it is not merely a personal choice but an expression of exhaustion in the face of an oppressive, exploitative reality filled with suffering and illness. Suicide is often associated with depression, although it is not the only possible explanation. In depression, it appears that “the subject interprets adversities as a signal and permission to give up. Triumphs are felt as defeats, and achievements as signs of insufficiency.”

To address physical and mental illness, one must attack its root causes, meaning a new society must be built. Yet a first obstacle is that one consequence of mental and physical illness is abandoning any long-term perspective, opting instead for immediate solutions, such as drug use. While alleviating suffering caused by capitalist society is not wrong, it is also essential to fight against one of capitalism’s cruelest consequences: the loss of a sense of collectivity and the pursuit of individualistic solutions.

A new society, where profit is not central and labor is not a heavy burden, can be a first step toward healthier living. A world in which misery and illness can be overcome must be constructed, and for this, workers must transform reality and engage in the struggle for socialism, thus overcoming the enduring consequences imposed daily by capitalist misery.

Civilizational Crisis

By Michel Goulart da Silva

Published 09/26/2025 — Others Words