is Islam a enemy to Communism/Anarchism

[D-MITCH777]

If a stateless classless state is established ,Capitalism will more than likely be forgotten But as people follow Islam there will always be someone calling for Islamic/Shariah law.

so does any one see people who call for islamic law a enemy the same way as capitalist

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Who is this "Islam" fellow and why is he so threatening? :rolleyes:


To make a serious point in a more serious manner, the problem isn't with "Islam" as an abstract entity the problem is with people who are dogmatic Muslims and think that their metaphysical assumptions about the world trump the autonomy of others and other communities. If someone wants to be a Muslim, Christian, Rastafarian, Buddhist, Jewish, Atheist or Pagan, more power to them. It's not about banning religion or metaphysical viewpoint its about fighting extremists and chauvinists.

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

If a stateless classless state is established ,Capitalism will more than likely be forgotten But as people follow Islam there will always be someone calling for Islamic/Shariah law.

so does any one see people who call for islamic law a enemy the same way as capitalist

No, Islam isn't an enemy to the worker's movement and I think a lot of Westerners misunderstand Islamic jurisprudence and shar'iah. I think Islam would be more of an enemy to the decadent ways of capital then it would be towards Socialism or the Socialist movement. Shar'iah is mainly the laws that apply to Muslims or the ummah (Muslim community) and not the non-Muslims. I think it should be pointed out that the brand of Shari'ah that the likes of Choudray and others put out there or the Salafi/Wahhabi version of it, isn't what the entire ummah endorses and in my belief to be inaccurate and wrong.

There is several schools of Islamic law or fiqh, Hanafi, Hanbali (commonly seen as the strictest or most literal), Maliki, Shafi'i or Jaf'ari (this is the Shia school of law not affiliated with the Sunni). The one in which you would follow is known as your madh'hab. I personally follow the Maliki madh'hab whereas my family has followed the Hanafi madh'hab, for example. The differences between the schools of fiqh vary in their subject matter like for example, posture of prayers, my family crosses their arms during the qiyam posture whereas I keep my arms at my sides.

There also seems to be some conflation of regional customs with the laws of Islam, both by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Like for the example, FGM. I have heard some (I stress some meaning rarily have I ever heard this) brothers argue that it's obligatory for women to do this, I however argue that it's abhorent, sexist, evil and that the true teachings of Islam state that we are not to mutilate or harm our bodies and this would definately qualify as such a thing. Or like how some think that nail polish is a bad thing, this is stupid. There are numerous areas which the shari'ah covers.

I think there are largely areas in which Islamic law and values would cross between Socialist ones. But I don't think Islam, generally speaking, or Islamic jurisprudence is inherently an enemy of Socialism, the worker's movement or revolution. I also would like to point out, I'm not overly religious or some nutter, I'm not trying to do daw'ah here, so mods don't misinterpret what I'm saying and get trigger happy but I feel it's necessary to talk in religious terms to give a proper perspective.

There really isn't one, uniting, version of the shar'iah, there is varying interpretations and practical applications of the law within the ummah. I think it's more of a matter of combating the reactionary misinterpretations of Islamic jurisprudence than combating the entire thing proper.

[ВАЛТЕР]

Islam an enemy? No.

Radical Islam or any religion for that matter an enemy? Very much so.

[Madslatter]

Fundamentalism from every sort of religion is dangerous to communism. Christian fundamentalism will a danger in Christian areas and Islamic fundamentalism will be a danger in Islamic areas. Radical Islamic law is no more dangerous than the sort of law that would be pushed forth by people who interpret the old testament literally.

[Nox]

Islam = Religion

Religion = Holding back the progression of mankind

Communism = Progression of mankind

Religion = Enemy of Communism

[Tommy4ever]

Islam isn't an enemy in itself, its clerics on the other hand are a part of the ruling class and therefore an enemy of socialism.

[Dogs On Acid]

Religion is reactionary and as such is in no way friendly to the Socialist cause.

It should not be encouraged, but enforcing Atheism is not a good idea either. So just let it slowly disappear. Science will eventually weaken it to a point of minority.

[ComradeFelix]

I've seen an increasing number of us that find that Islam is totally palatable and that it doesn't conflict with the basic tenets of marxism. These same people also usually condemn christianity outright for all the right reasons.
All religion is poison. Even though Islam is in the minority in the Western world at the moment, it should not be given a reprieve just for that reason. People are too easily swayed by the idea that Islam and Judaism are anti-Christianities of sorts and therefore, positive things to be supported. This seems to be in error.

Any thoughts?

[Chris]

All kinds of religious fundamentalism and organised religion is an enemy of marxists, and marxists are an enemy to them. Muslims, christians etc? Not really. I've met quite a few religious marxists, and I am partially one myself. I'm a member of the state church, at least, but that has mostly to do with it being a pain in the ass to get out of it.

[BIG BROTHER]

Karl Marx would be disgusted with the interpretation some of you folks have about religion.

Religion is a way in which people try to aleviate the alienation that they feel in society, you can think of it more of a sysmpton rather than a desease.

Just like the ruling class uses religion to oppress, so is liberation theology used to liberate, so it can go either way.

The enemies of communism is not religious folks, but alienation and the ruling class which uses whatever tools it may have at its disposal to oppress people.

[∞]

I grew up in a muslim family. Although in communism muslims and christians would be able to practice what they want, they both contradict Marxism on philosophic grounds. The absence of religion will help bring about communism.

[ComradeFelix]

What happens when religion is being used as a tool for oppression? Religion does not always follow, if even most of the time, a path towards enlightened liberation theology or whatever terms are used these days.
If a religion's sole offense to liberty is making a woman wear a veil or making a gay person die for his very being, then the entire religion is a threat to us all. Unless religious people are perfectly okay with picking and choosing, then they cannot claim that their beliefs are liberating for anyone except themselves.

[BIG BROTHER]

What happens when religion is being used as a tool for oppression? Religion does not always follow, if even most of the time, a path towards enlightened liberation theology or whatever terms are used these days.
If a religion's sole offense to liberty is making a woman wear a veil or making a gay person die for his very being, then the entire religion is a threat to us all. Unless religious people are perfectly okay with picking and choosing, then they cannot claim that their beliefs are liberating for anyone except themselves.

Religion is a tool very well said, and just like the State it has been used and its used many times to oppress.

But just like the state you have to look at its source, religions are a form in which people aleviate their alienation from the world and society through "metaphysical means" since they have no way of doing in the real world.

Attacking religion, for the sakes of religion when its not pushing a reactionary agenda instead of fighting its root cause, is akin to conservative politicas who seek to repres through the use of the police, gangs instead of addressing the socio economic conditiosn that create them.

[00000000000]

I'm personally an anti-theist (always have been, regardless of the political views I've held over the years). Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Mornonism etc etc, I feel are all rejections of reason and are a hinderance to future human progress.
That said, I don't think Islam, or any other religion, is really an 'enemy' to be defeated by force, more an idea that needs to be helped on a road toward dieing out and disappearing forever (when socialism / communism dominate, current major reilgions will fade just like the beliefs of the Ancient kingdoms; Egypt, Greece, Rome pre-christianity)

[Kornilios Sunshine]

Religions don't oppose Communism.Communism opposes Religions because they are lies.That doesn't mean however, you can't be a Christian or Muslim Communist.

[Chairman Wow]

Religion is an enemy that can be fought with education, I think. A lot of religious faith is either inherited (I was a 'confirmed' Catholic before I even understood what it was) or the product of poor living conditions (prison populations, impoverished areas, etc. - people turn to religion when there's nothing left to turn to). In a workers state, the root of the problem will be dealt with and religion will become an irrelevance.

[thefinalmarch]

Communism will help bring about the absence of religion.
Fixed :)

[Devrim]

I think there are largely areas in which Islamic law and values would cross between Socialist ones. But I don't think Islam, generally speaking, or Islamic jurisprudence is inherently an enemy of Socialism, the worker's movement or revolution.

The system that Islam advocates is invariably opposed to communism. One involves the abolish of the law of value, and the end of money. The other regulates how much alms should be given to the poor.

Devrim

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

The system that Islam advocates is invariably opposed to communism. One involves the abolish of the law of value, and the end of money. The other regulates how much alms should be given to the poor.

Yeah, in feudal Meccan society however when systems change some rulings become null and void such as the rulings on slavery. When slavery is abolished then the rulings pertaining to that become null; they exist solely as to instruct the Muslim how to be ethical and morally upright in all matters. Same could be said for the above.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

If a stateless classless state is established ,Capitalism will more than likely be forgotten But as people follow Islam there will always be someone calling for Islamic/Shariah law.

Isn't this as presumptuous as the ancient Greeks assuming that modern capitalists would make sacrifices to the Olympians?


so does any one see people who call for islamic law a enemy the same way as capitalist

People should be free to follow any stupid silly little footling rules they damn well please, but should they attempt to impose such rules on others, then society should come down on them like the ton of proverbial bricks.

What this means is that communist/anarchist society should be secular.

[Devrim]

Yeah, in feudal Meccan society however when systems change some rulings become null and void such as the rulings on slavery. When slavery is abolished then the rulings pertaining to that become null; they exist solely as to instruct the Muslim how to be ethical and morally upright in all matters. Same could be said for the above.

Except the Koran for Muslims isn't a book written by men explaining how to live at that moment. It is the directly revealed word of God. If it advocates this system then for Muslims it is the way that God advocates people live. At no point does God say something like "this system will work until you destroy the law of value, and then you should replace it with communism".

By the way, Slavery was formally abolished in the Hejaz in 1962, but in reality still persists today.

Devrim

[B0LSHEVIK]

All religions are enemies of the left. Ultimately, these 'churches' will always side with those willing to protect their power, prestige, and property.

So yes.

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

Except the Koran for Muslims isn't a book written by men explaining how to live at that moment.

No, of course not, to me and billions of others it is the revealed word of Allah (swt) given to the Prophet (pbuh) however it would be important to note the context in which said revelations occured to deduce it's proper meaning and interpretation.



It is the directly revealed word of God. If it advocates this system then for Muslims it is the way that God advocates people live. At no point does God say something like "this system will work until you destroy the law of value, and then you should replace it with communism".


I would again argue we're speaking within the context of feudal Meccan society; the reforms that are discussed are meant to be applied to that society. If a system changes in a given nation-state then said rulings would become null and void and couldn't be applied to modern day socieities without some absurd vain attempt to do so. Islam was meant for all peoples of all time, that's kind of the whole point, kind of why Muhammad (pbuh) was considered khatim an-nabiyin. It would seem that nations changing, systems changing and rulings no longer applying due to these changes would have been assumed and implied.


By the way, Slavery was formally abolished in the Hejaz in 1962, but in reality still persists today.

I'm well aware of this and this is most unfortunate.

[Luc]

I would say that Religion is not an enemy of Communism/Anarchism.

Why?

Because all the terms "Religion" and "Communism/Anarchism" are way too broad to state that they are against eachother.

Some Communist/Anarchist ideologies are friendly or atleast neutral to religions (therefore they are not "enemies") while others are absolutely opposed to religion (enemies).

Since 2/3 of the positions (friendly, neutral, and enemy/against) do not make those with that position "enemies" I like to think that it is safe to say that the majority of Communisms/Anarchisms are not enemies of and/or are inherently against religion.

Fundamentalists on the other hand are enemies and danger to everything and everyone.

edit: my bad just noticed that it was specifically Islam (forgot while I was typing lol) well anyways same idea Islam is too broad a term (as said before in other post(s)) just like christianity with it's many chirstianities:lol:

p.s. yeah that right I just used a parenthesis in a parenthesis, come get me grammar (parenthesis?) Nazi's :ninja:

[B0LSHEVIK]

I would say that Religion is not an enemy of Communism/Anarchism.

Why?

Because all the terms "Religion" and "Communism/Anarchism" are way too broad to state that they are against eachother.

Some Communist/Anarchist ideologies are friendly or atleast neutral to religions (therefore they are not "enemies") while others are absolutely opposed to religion (enemies).

Since 2/3 of the positions (friendly, neutral, and enemy/against) do not make those with that position "enemies" I like to think that it is safe to say that the majority of Communisms/Anarchisms are not enemies of and/or are inherently against religion.

Fundamentalists on the other hand are enemies and danger to everything and everyone.

Good points. Marx would call religion a symptom of people oppressed and uneducated, an opiate, to numb the pain so to say. True.

But, I've seen pictures of priests saluting Franco and fascists troops goosestepping in formation. But good points indeed.

[Luc]

Good points. Marx would call religion a symptom of people oppressed and uneducated, an opiate, to numb the pain so to say. True.

But, I've seen pictures of priests saluting Franco and fascists troops goosestepping in formation. But good points indeed.

first point: Ah, yes I like the definition myself but that doesn't cover non-marxists :blackA: and others

second: Yeah that is a problem I got a book with a priest shaking Hitler's hand:scared: (Paths to a Parilamentary Democracy about German history)

But they aren't all the preists in the world:cool:

[B0LSHEVIK]

first point: Ah, yes I like the definition myself but that doesn't cover non-marxists :blackA: and others

second: Yeah that is a problem I got a book with a priest shaking Hitler's hand:scared: (Paths to a Parilamentary Democracy about German history)

But they aren't all the preists in the world:cool:

I agree with you. Though I think most Anarchists would feel that socialist principles should be the global religion.

I just think that our goal as socialists should be to, ultimately to end religious* nonsense. Thats my .02 cents.

[Luc]

I agree with you. Though I think most Anarchists would feel that socialist principles should be the global religion.

I just think that our goal as socialists should be to, ultimately to end religion nonsense. Thats my .02 cents.

Second one: Indeed, we end it by ending the conditions that produce religion:cool:

[Red And Black Sabot]

If a stateless classless state is established ,Capitalism will more than likely be forgotten But as people follow Islam there will always be someone calling for Islamic/Shariah law.

so does any one see people who call for islamic law a enemy the same way as capitalist

If they want it for themselves and practice it for their own spiritual reasons, that's absolutely fine. If someone tries to impose it on me, they will find in me a new enemy.

[ComradeFelix]

If they want it for themselves and practice it for their own spiritual reasons, that's absolutely fine. If someone tries to impose it on me, they will find in me a new enemy.


But isn't a "live and let live" mentality not sufficient in this situation? Once the stateless classless state is established, doesn't religion give them an unscientific and completely subjective reason to stand apart from everyone else? Spiritual hubris is one of the worst forms of pride; Hasn't it proven to be an incredibly divisive force in the history of the human race? A priestly class, or one that believes itself to be just that, will always arise when people believe that their level of understanding of the supernatural is beyond others' understanding. It serves no other purpose than to divide the proletariat and perpetuate the cycle of class struggle, in this case, between the self-appointed spiritual leaders and their subjects.

It seems to me that religion is poisonous to communism just for this reason alone. Maybe if everyone followed the same religion it could be justified as a unifying measure. I can't see this being an achievable goal. Though I believe that to be united under empty ritual and myth is, quite honestly, to be united under nothing.

Not being a particularly religious person, maybe my understanding of this topic is skewed.

[Agent Equality]

short and simple answer: yes it is, just like every other religion(perhaps minus buddhism)

[∞]

short and simple answer: yes it is, just like every other religion(perhaps minues buddhism)

Unless you're a Maoist.

[∞]

Mohammad (peanuts be upon him) practiced pedophilia and was reactionary.

[DarkPast]

short and simple answer: yes it is, just like every other religion(perhaps minus buddhism)


Unless you're a Maoist.

Well the "original" buddhism was more like philosophy with a few religious elements thrown in (basically reincarnation & karma). However, the "folk buddhism" that developed from it is more like a "classical" religion (and that's probably why the maoists targeted them).


Anyway, I'd say that religious institutions are our enemy, not individual believers or religions per se.