Evolutionism vs creationism

[gut]

I call it all good eatin'

[minchazo]

No, it's entirely possible to be both communist and religious. Indeed, one could argue that the early Church was the prototypical communist collective--everyone sold their property to be used for the common good, for example. There are also a number of communist parties in various European countries that have enjoyed some measure of success despite many of those countries being highly religious.

My mistake; I should have referred specifically to Marxism, not communism. So I'll ask my question again (correctly, this time):
Isn't Marxism a form of organized atheism?
The earlier 4 examples of "really bad people," 3 were Marxists (Pol Pot, Mao, and Stalin) and attempt to destroy all religion in their country.

[JellySlayer]

My mistake; I should have referred specifically to Marxism, not communism. So I'll ask my question again (correctly, this time):
Isn't Marxism a form of organized atheism?
The earlier 4 examples of "really bad people," 3 were Marxists (Pol Pot, Mao, and Stalin) and attempt to destroy all religion in their country.

Marxism is an economic and social philosophy that argues for the morality of a communist state. It is atheistic in the sense that it makes no particular reference to a creator, although, I hasten to add, neither to most modern political philosophies including liberalism, socialism, social democracy, libertarianism, objectivism, etc. Marx in particular was intensely critical of Christianity in particular, which he saw as an extension of the power system used to enslave the masses. I suppose you could say that Marxism is a form of organized atheism because the purpose of Marxism has nothing to do with religion. But then, by that reasoning, you could equally say that democracy is a form of organized atheism for the same reason. And just as it is possible to adopt a Christian or otherwise religious perspective on democracy, it is equally possible to adopt a Christian or religious perspective on Marxism.

[fazisi]

I find all religion to support current power system of a group.

For example, ancient Australian tribes each assigned to themselves an animal totem or animal spirit, such as the tribe of the kangaroo. This animal is considered sacred to them. However, the purpose of this is a symbol of to which tribe they belong. All the grown men of a tribe have gone through certain trials and were considered equal members of a tribe. This is because most men had the exact same job in the tribe of being protectors and hunters.

Another example is the Greek pantheon and the strange existance of ancient Greece. They all shared the same language, customs and religion but were all individual states that constantly fought each other. There were two stages to the common Greek political structure: monarchy then democracy. First with a monarchy, each state was ruled by a king and they fought with each other but banded together to fight outside forces. This reflects the gods fighting each other but working together for common goals. Second is democracy in which the gods didn't fight each other as much but worked together more often.

Another is Christianity and monarchy. All in servitude to each other and following the church's hierarchical structure of regular folk < deacons < priests < bishops < pope (with other shit in between), this fit perfectly with the feudal structure.

[garyd]

Communism is a religion of sorts. It is, as marx envisoned it, the notion that a state that is powerful and intrusive enough to mae even a half hearted attempt at, "from each according to his means, to each according to his needs" wil eventually wither away. This by the way isn't ever going to happen.

This is why attempts at atheistic communism always ended in blood baths.and truly communistic societies like the Shakers and Hutterites are almost always commposed of relitively small groups of like minded religious folk, who are, more often than not, Christians.

[minchazo]

I suppose you could say that Marxism is a form of organized atheism because the purpose of Marxism has nothing to do with religion. But then, by that reasoning, you could equally say that democracy is a form of organized atheism for the same reason. And just as it is possible to adopt a Christian or otherwise religious perspective on democracy, it is equally possible to adopt a Christian or religious perspective on Marxism.

Interesting... I thought I'd read enough on Marxism to make a coherent argument, but I was unaware that there are multiple versions. Marx's initial concept could be argued that it was either pro-atheist or accepted religion as a necessary evil.

Since Lenin, Marxism has been definitely atheist. Lenin even stated, "Atheism is a natural and inseparable part of Marxism"1 Both Pol Pot and Mao's actions show they held the same opinion.

Heh, in looking for more info on Marxism, I found two articles that express the point I wanted to make: Government-led atheism is as bad as government-led religion. Don't do either one!

[minchazo]

I find all religion to support current power system of a group.

I disagree. The Protestant reformation adjusted the power system controlled by the Catholic church. Religion can be a power system in and of itself. In the Middle Ages the Catholic church itself could topple political rulers. Did you mean 'mirror' instead of support?

[JellySlayer]

Exactly what constitutes Marxism is not always clear in my mind. I haven't done enough research on the subject to give a full account, but I am aware of various forms of Marxism: Marx-Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, Marxism-Deleonism, Marxism feminism, etc. Given that Marxism was quite popular for several decades, it's unsurprising that various philosophers (although I hesitate to call all of these people philosophers) have had their own take on it. If there's one thing academia is good at, it's taking some singular concept and making a couple hundred variations on it garyd is correct that in practice, many Marxist (and other dictatorial regimes) came to resemble a religion with either the state or the leader of "the movement" becoming symbolically associated with the divine. This is a fairly typical way for a dictator to subvert the masses--to claim the mandate of heaven or something similar.

I don't feel that it is terribly appropriate for the state to be telling people what they ought to believe about anything. As a consequence of this, I do feel that the most appropriate position for the state itself is secularism.

[fazisi]

I find all religion to support current power system of a group.

I disagree. The Protestant reformation adjusted the power system controlled by the Catholic church. Religion can be a power system in and of itself. In the Middle Ages the Catholic church itself could topple political rulers. Did you mean 'mirror' instead of support?

Both. The religious structure mirrors the power structure. Because this causes a duality in the masses acceptance of how they should be ruled, both support each other. This was especially true in ages past where religion was a major part of politics, such as when ancient Greek kings had to consult with the oracle before making major decisions.

The Protestant reformation, I feel, was what allowed the change between feudal monarchies and modern day democracy. Both atheism and "multitheism" (the belief that there are many acceptable beliefs, I don't know if there is a real word for this but I'm making one up now) allow for the seperation of religion from politics.

[garyd]

Or as in the current Middle East where the ruler is often aided and abetted by the religious authorities and vice versa.