State Atheism?

[The Old Man from Scene 24]

I'm all for it. This question also applies to agnostics.

[31okiL]

Load of bullshit.

[Proukunin]

I don't believe in enforcing atheism, But I do think that by having a more atheist approach to society would be for the best.

[xub3rn00dlex]

I don't believe in enforcing atheism, But I do think that by having a more atheist approach to society would be for the best.

Agree with you 100%. Enforcing of atheism is just the same as enforcing any other religion upon people. It's a personal choice that cannot really be controlled, but it would be better if completely separated from politics.

[The Old Man from Scene 24]

Yeah, you're probably right.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I'm all for the state promoting Atheism.Enforcing it would be difficult,but propagating and furthering rational beliefs would be greatly beneficial.

[Koba1917]

State Secularism. The government should have no say in religion only settling disputes and other problems. I'm a Ignostic and a Secular Humanist.

[The Man]

This would be stupid. Would we literally force Atheism on the very foundations of the common man? Not to mention, People would still practice religion in a more 'underground' kind of style. Imagine the amount of resistance that would be gathered if such ideas were implemented.

However, if we were discussing a state with promoted Free Thought, I would definitely support it during Revolution Stages, i.e. DTOP.

[Revolutionair]

It's stupid as fuck. It is also anti-Marxist.

[xub3rn00dlex]

This would be stupid. Would we literally force Atheism on the very foundations of the common man? Not to mention, People would still practice religion in a more 'underground' kind of style. Imagine the amount of resistance that would be gathered if such ideas were implemented.

However, if we were discussing a state with promoted Free Thought, I would definitely support it during Revolution Stages, i.e. DTOP.

I would also be worried about the further radicalization of the various religious sects. Your idea for the promotion of free thought hits the nail on the head really, as it exposes the people to alternate views, and then lets them make the decision as to whether or not those views tie in with their religion.

[Ismail]

Albania was the only country to completely ban religion, both publicly and privately. It resulted in a lot of people being agnostic because religion was simply never discussed in society or in the schools (except how it was struggled against), so Albania is about 70% agnostic today as a result of this, which was concurrent with most Albanians being very young owing to high birthrates, etc.

On the downside it was very unpopular. Ex-priests were executed for performing baptisms on infants and the mothers were sent into labor camps. It's used in modern-day Albania as one of the supposed "examples" of the "evils" of communism.

Hoxha actually recalled (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/stalin/meet2.htm) a 1949 meeting with Stalin, and religion was briefly discussed:

"How many religious beliefs are there in Albania," Comrade Stalin inquired, "and what language is spoken?"

"In Albania," I replied, "there are three religions: Moslem, Orthodox and Catholic. The population which professes these three faiths is of the same nationality - Albanian, therefore the only language used is Albanian, with the exception of the Greek national minority which speak their mother tongue."

From time to time, while I was speaking, Stalin took out his pipe and filled it with tobacco. I noticed that he did not use any special tobacco, but took "Kazbek" cigarettes, tore them open, discarded the paper and filled his pipe with the tobacco. After listening to my answer, he said:

"You are a separate people, just like the Persians and the Arabs, who have the same religion as the Turks. Your ancestors existed before the Romans and the Turks. Religion has nothing to do with nationality and statehood."

And in the course of our conversation, he asked me:

"Do you eat pork, Comrade Enver?"

"Yes, I do!" I said.

"The Moslem religion prohibits this among its believers," he said. "This is an old, outdated custom. Nevertheless," he went on, "the question of religious beliefs must be kept well in mind, must be handled with great care, because the religious feelings of the people must not be offended. These feelings have been cultivated in the people for many centuries, and great patience is called for on this question, because the stand towards it is important for the compactness and unity of the people."Oddly enough, even though Hoxha was probably the most pro-Stalin leader ever, he didn't seem to follow Stalin here.

[Sir Comradical]

Albania was the only country to completely ban religion, both publicly and privately. It resulted in a lot of people being agnostic because religion was simply never discussed in society or in the schools (except how it was struggled against), so Albania is about 70% agnostic today as a result of this, which was concurrent with most Albanians being very young owing to high birthrates, etc.

On the downside it was very unpopular. Ex-priests were executed for performing baptisms on infants and the mothers were sent into labor camps. It's used in modern-day Albania as one of the supposed "examples" of the "evils" of communism.

When was this?

[Ismail]

When was this?Well the incident I recall was in 1980 or 1981. It was mentioned by Owen Pearson in his book Albania as Dictatorship and Democracy. Edwin E. Jacques in his book The Albanians also gives various examples of the mistreatment (to put it lightly) of priests from the 1940's onwards. Even in its initial years the Albanian Government took a hardline stance on religious persons and institutions.

[Sir Comradical]

Well the incident I recall was in 1980 or 1981. It was mentioned by Owen Pearson in his book Albania as Dictatorship and Democracy. Edwin E. Jacques in his book The Albanians also gives various examples of the mistreatment (to put it lightly) of priests from the 1940's onwards. Even in its initial years the Albanian Government took a hardline stance on religious persons and institutions.

Do you think it was justified?

[Ismail]

Do you think it was justified?No, it alienated people. The 1940's activities were alright (basically neutralizing the influence of the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church which was encouraging Greek irredentism, and various Islamic orders), but the 1967 campaign to eradicate religion was ultra-left and can be partially blamed on the strong relationship between Albania and China at the time, with many Albanians wanting to inaugurate their own version of the GPCR.

[Sir Comradical]

No, it alienated people. The 1940's activities were alright (basically neutralizing the influence of the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church which was encouraging Greek irredentism, and various Islamic orders), but the 1967 campaign to eradicate religion was ultra-left and can be partially blamed on the strong relationship between Albania and China at the time, with many Albanians wanting to inaugurate their own version of the GPCR.

I thought you meant that the unpopularity of it was the downside. Just checking.

[Ismail]

In December 1984 Hoxha stated (http://ml-review.ca/aml/Albania/ALBANIANLIFE/No321985.htm) that, "On the other hand, we have not compelled, nor do we compel, anyone by administrative measures to renounce his religious views. Religion is a question of personal conscience." Private religious worship was increasingly tolerated after 1983 so long as the subject was kept completely private. Despite this though open religious belief remained outlawed until 1990.

In World Christianity and Marxism it is noted that (p. 107), " The vestiges of belief that did survive were pathetic remnants at best. For instance, one refugee reported having secretly worn a crucifix, but only after his escape from Albania did he discover that it had something to do with Christianity[/URL]. A Muslim escapee recalled having heard his father muttering behind closed curtains. It never dawned on him that this was a prayer until he heard something similar outside Albania[URL="http://www.questia.com/read/55488295"] (http://www.questia.com/read/55488295). As for the small Jewish community, apparently the only surviving custom was the eating of sweets in memory of the dead." Furthermore (p. 108), "The first public mass was celebrated November 4 [1990], in a cemetery chapel in Shkodra, by Simon Jubani, released in 1989 after twenty-six years of imprisonment. The crowd of 5,000 worshipers was made up of Catholics, few of whom could remember this central rite of the Church. Interestingly enough, there were also substantial numbers of Muslims present, most of them apparently unaware of the difference between Christianity and Islam. Here already was a sign of the campaign's success."

[jake williams]

I don't understand what "state atheism" means.

Atheism isn't a religious ideology, much less a whole worldview. Insofar as atheism represents only and exactly the absense of a belief in a god, though, "state atheism" is simply any policy other than "state theism" - if you don't have state theism, which we shouldn't, you have state atheism. In that sense, we should absolutely have state atheism.

What this means in practice though is an important question. I have a lot of problems with different types of religious repression, partly for ethical reasons and partly because I simply don't think they're effective. But all sorts of theocratic states exist with varying degrees of religious repression. Some religions explicitly allow for others exist. So there's no reason to believe that an "atheist state" would necessarily try to eliminate religion, murder priests, etc.

That said, while some aspects of religion as a social phenomenon are pretty harmless, others are quite harmful, or at very least shouldn't be promoted. I don't think there's easy answers. What I will say is that at no point in history have a whole people's religious beliefs fundamentally changed because of state policy. Religious beliefs of a people, at any given time, partly reflect culture and history, but mostly reflect the material conditions faced by the people.

[Davie zepeda]

Give the people what they need, and then ask them about God, after that you will have minority in faith, but who is to oppress them from that faith, Atheism is as to all idea's, they are meant to be enforced. We teach and explain why u need reject folk tales and reactionary thought.

[MaximMK]

Today most of the people in my country don't even know what the bible says or why they do some of the traditions but still believe. Enforcing is bad but organizing debates on TVs is gonna help. There will always be people that will believe i think we cannot destroy religion in the next 10 - 20 years but in time it will be forgotten with all the progress we have now. Unless right-wings continue to support religion and waste so much cash on pointless giant crosses and churches.

[Minima]

~
there are so many bad reasons to participate in religion that any religion existing under state atheism would be much truer to the religious principles of whatever religious doctrine.

~
the marvels it did for china. I stand by Mao's position against religion. It is only out of pragmatism that the radical left ever aligned itself with religion. how religious plurality ever got mistaken as integral to it's tenets is beyond me.

There is a great emancipatory potential in Christianity. we might be able to "emancipate" all their ideals of brotherhood, goodwill, renunciation of violence, forgiveness and even faith... all of that, from the superstition of god.

Don't mistake me for the moronic "militant atheism" of Richard Dawkins and the like. that is a whole new barrel of cake.