Why are Anarchists more opposed to Religion than Marxists?

[spiltteeth]

I'm not looking for an argument, but I noticed anarchists seem a lot more opposed to religion than marxists/other communists. It's odd to me, since a common anarchist objection to some Marxists is a perceived "authoritarian/dictatorial" tendency; and many anarchists have said they'd be opposed to churches in a socialist country, yet Kim Jong Il uses public funds to support churches, as did Lenin and Stalin.

When it comes to religion, anarchists take a less lenient stance than Kim Jong-il and Stalin!

Why is this? Again, I am genuinely interested in answers.

[Decolonize The Left]

In the first place, I don't think anyone here would agree that Stalin and Kim Jong Il are representative of marxists in any sense.

In the second place, classic Marxism put forth the idea that institutionalized religion would die off with the collapse of capitalism and restructuring of productive forces via socialism. This is inherently less aggressive than the anti-theist (sometimes a part of anarchism) stance that religion is positively harmful to society.

In the third place, many anarchists are religious. There is ample information of theist anarchists on the internet - perhaps the wikipedia page on anarchism and religion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_and_religion) is a good place to start?

- August

[spiltteeth]

That's pretty much what I thought. I know Jesus Radicals are large anarchist group. It just seems, as you say, marxists are not anti=theist exactly, but as a believer most of the outrage, even moral, seems to come from anarchists, I was simply wondering if I might be missing something.

[Raúl Duke]

It's a historical trend in anarchism, probably going back to Bakunin.

There's this old slogan in anarchism: No Gods No Masters.

Also, during the time of the international and all the way to about WWII or so anarchism was popular in "Latin" countries like Spain, Italy, France, and even Latin-America. Here, radicals of all stripes have had a anti-clerical stance due to the influence of the Catholic Church in these societies; etc

[Walt]

Kim Jong-il uses public funds to support Christian churches? I HIGHLY doubt that. You probably just got a whiff of pro-DPRK propaganda. It's definitely not in his best interest to do that, and it makes more sense for him NOT to do it.

[spiltteeth]

Kim Jong-il uses public funds to support Christian churches? I HIGHLY doubt that. You probably just got a whiff of pro-DPRK propaganda. It's definitely not in his best interest to do that, and it makes more sense for him NOT to do it.

I admit it's terribly difficult to sort out whats real or not concerning DPRK, so maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you know.

The official government statistics state that North Korea has 10,000 Protestants, 10,000 Buddhists, 4,000 Catholics and 40,000 members of the Chondogyo Young Friends Party, a government approved group based on a traditional religious movement. South Korean church groups give much higher estimates but these are only estimates. At least two Protestant and one Catholic Church have operated in Pyongyang since 1988. One of the Protestant Churches is dedicated to the memory of “Great Leader” Kim Il Sung’s mother, who was a Presbyterian deacon.

Plus this is interesting, abstracts from President KIM IL SUNG’s Reminiscences “WITH THE CENTURY” Vol. 5


One year the Rev. Kim Song Rak, a Korean resident in the United States, paid a visit to the homeland. During a luncheon with him, I advised him to pray before taking meals. At the time the Rev. Kim Song Rak was extremely surprised at my advice. He was puzzled that the President of a communist state was as kind as to show concern about the prayers of a Christian.
I had not intended to make a good impression or planned to seek a propaganda effect and make out that we do not take a negative attitude towards religion and its believers, when I advised the Rev. Kim Song Rak to say prayers before the meal that day. I was motivated by the hospitality of a typical host, eager to entertain his guest with honor and by the pure humanitarian desire to help him, a faithful Christian, in his life, freely adhere to Christian rules during his stay in the homeland.
The provision on religious freedom stipulated in the Constitution of our country is not an empty phrase or promise.
We have never trampled upon freedom of faith or oppressed its believers. If there were men of religion, who were punished or suffered political trials under the Government of me Republic, they were criminals or traitors to the nation, who had sold out the interests of our country and people.
Of course there were cases, which caused social commotion owing to factionalist deviation of discriminating religious people and antagonizing religion itself in some local areas after liberation. But this was not a universal phenomenon, which happened everywhere, much less an abuse caused by the organizational intention or directions of the centre.
There were a large number of churches and temples in our country before the outbreak of the Fatherland Liberation War2i against the US imperialists. When I visited Chilgol after the country’s liberation, there was a church I had known of in my Changdok School days. There were two grand churches on Namsan Hill of Pyongyang, where the Grand People’s Study House now stands. These buildings were destroyed by the planes of Americans, who profess themselves to be the apostles of “God”. The temples and hermitages with Buddhist images were also bombed. The crucifixes, icons and bibles were all reduced to ashes or buried under the ruins.
The believers were killed and passed on to the world beyond.
In this way the Americans destroyed our churches and killed religious people. “God” could not rescue them from disaster. This led to a decline in churchgoers among our people during the war. Our religionists felt no more need to pray to “God” for their access to “Heaven”. Believers, who became conscious of the fact that religion was powerless in shaping the destiny of human beings, renounced their faith of their own accord and became advocates of the Juche idea—that man is the master of everything and decides everything, is the creator and dominator of the world. After the war, they did not hurry to rebuild the churches by gathering donations. Instead, first dwelling houses, factories and schools were built.
As for our younger generation, no young man or child believes that they will be blessed and have access to Paradise, only when they worship “God”, “Heaven” or Buddha. Consequently they do not embrace religion or join religious bodies.
At present, as in the past, we do not consider religion as bad or persecute its followers. On the contrary, the state builds churches free of charge for them and provides them with living quarters. A few years ago a religious department was newly instituted in the faculty of history of Kim Il Sung University to produce religious specialists. In our country the activities of all religious organizations and men of religion enjoy solid legal protection as in other countries.
It is said that there are a large number of religious people in south Korea. They include quite a few patriots and fighters, active on the three fronts of democracy, reunification and peace.
The increase in the number of patriots seeking an alliance with communism among the religionists in south Korea and abroad does not necessarily mean that they are adherents of The Communist Manifesto. The bond of union between us and them is provided by the idea and sentiments, based on love for the country and nation.
Such ties also existed in the 1930s. It was the principle of the united front, elucidated in the Ten-Point Program of the ARF, that we could join hands with any social circle, which loved the country and nation. This principle united us with Tojong Pak In Jin.
Some people distort our idea on the freedom of faith as a conciliatory trick aimed at inveigling religious people into the “web” of the united front. Such a lie will never pass, however plausible it may sound. The warm relations I had with O Tong Jin, Son Jong Do, Choe Tong O, Kang Je Ha and other believers were based on pure feelings of love for the country and nation and had nothing to do with any stratagem.
I had no intention to transform them into followers of Marx or supporters of the Communist Party. I only respected their faith, personality and human rights.

[fidzboi]

I would perhaps suggest that the answer to the question is a combination of a few different factors: (1) 'Mr. anarchism' is an older man than 'Mr. Marxism', and in this sense, spending his childhood in the feudal world he witnessed and theorised against more oppressive and brutal Religious institutions than Marx did; (2) as has already been mentioned, Marx saw religion as 'withering away' leading to later Marxists not really seeing it as as big an issue; (3) 20th century Marxist-Leninist Parties, unlike the Bolshevik Party, aimed to create mass parties where ideological clarity was seen as less important and therefore having members, regardless of whether they had religious or otherwise misguided views, was most important; (4) anarchists have a tendency towards the opposite approach, they wish to remain outwardly revolutionary and are more opposed to populist approaches; (5) the experience of the anarchists in Spain, which is the crown jewel of 20th century anarchism.


I'm sure there are more... perhaps good sense on the part of the anarchists being one of them? ;)

[Özkan]

I believe that it is because in anarchy there is no authority. In religions, of course there is an authority: God. The other authorities are holy books and prophets. That's why they totally reject religion.

[Black_Flag]

a common anarchist objection to some Marxists is a perceived "authoritarian/dictatorial" tendency;

For me, and perhaps many other anarchists, it's this authoritarian/dictorial tendency that's present in many religions, nobably the Abrahamic ones, that makes me feel it's necessary to oppose religion.
These religions are patriarchal in nature so if we oppose the hierarchy created by capitalism we should also oppose the hierarchy created by religion.

And from a personal point of view i think it's all load of balls :p

[Durruti's Ghost]

Well, I've heard it said that Marxism is primarily a historical discourse about what will happen, while anarchism is primarily an ethical discourse about what should happen. Perhaps this allows anarchism to take a more extreme view than Marxism on the subject?

A more obvious explanation is that the experience of the Spanish Civil War, in which the Church sided with the fascists, has shaped our general attitude toward religion.

[Revy]

Religion is irrational, that is why it is not popular on the left.

Revolutionaries actively take up the idea that it is the working class of the world that will liberate itself. Praying to some Sky Daddy to save you is anti-thetical to this point. If God is a communist, he could make the world communist. So either God is asleep, apathetic or non-existent.

[Red Icepick]

Religion is irrational, that is why it is not popular on the left.

Revolutionaries actively take up the idea that it is the working class of the world that will liberate itself. Praying to some Sky Daddy to save you is anti-thetical to this point. If God is a communist, he could make the world communist. So either God is asleep, apathetic or non-existent.

Or maybe he's munching on popcorn, having a great time watching the insane spectacle unfold?

[Revy]

Well, I am talking about conventional theistic religion, which is what we're dealing with here, not the small group of (mostly) intellectuals who believe in deism or pantheism, or whatever, that God is an observer, and leaves us to do whatever we please.

Ask a religious person if they think god does miracles, answers prayers, takes an active role on Earth matters. All the mainstream religious doctrines show that whether God is performing grandiose miracles or a terrifying apocalypse, or putting a man on Earth to die for our sins, he takes an active role.

So, it must follow, that if God has our best interests in mind, and would like each of us that are good people but not followers to be "saved" to enter his Magic Kingdom, then he must reveal himself, stop beating around the burning bush, and bring his "paradise" here. Because communicating to us through a book and various religious charlatans isn't convincing, and doesn't really prove you're worthy of worship. Contact, maybe, worship, no. I might worship an omnipotent being, but not whatever this Christian God could only be. I guess you could say "If God farts, does it make a sound?". God sounds so majestic but is so removed from our lives.

I am not saying that all religious people are irrational. There have been many great people, including many on the left, who have been religious. But religion only has a positive political potential when it is motivated by a strong sense of humanism. If not, it's useless for our struggles.

[Jethro Tull]

For what it's worth, I'm a religious anarchist who thinks a lot of Marxism is atheistic garbage. :D

[rhys]

Without wanting to offend Anarchist comrades, it seems to me a matter of how closely you are involved in struggle. In a strike or whatever you're not bothered if the people striking with you are Muslims, Roman Catholics, Jews or Atheists as long as those beliefs are not used to break down their resolve. The more people move away from the class struggle the more some of them (people like Polly Toynbee over here, for instance) shout about religion: it helps them feel young and revolutionary, poor dabs. It seems to me, though, that the days of 'pie in the sky when you die' are long, long gone: it is like getting worked up about the Tithe when there isn't one. Individualist and gradualist anarchists are really violent against religion. Can't get excited about it myself.

[Os Cangaceiros]

According to base-superstructure theory, religion is part of the superstructure that's dependent on (and formed to support) the economic base. If there's a different base (i.e. not capitalism), organized religion as we know it would cease to exist.

If I understand it correctly, that's the Marxist position.

[rebelmouse]

I am an anarchist and I am against organized religion. it would be abolished during revolution. but I understand that people are people and many of them will stay superstitious. you can see even today some sport players do something exactly amount of time (tap the ball, tennis players) because he/she beliefs he/she will loose game if he/she doesn't do so. or there will be people who are interested for magic, and make their private sessions. but it is individual autonomy and right to be superstitious, important is to create freedom with abolishing of organized institutions which serves to individuals to rule over life of others. the rest is job of community in anarchism to educate people in order to avoid primitive beliefs and behaviour.