Atheist Marxist

[Stew312856]

Preparing for grad school, studying Marx and other essential writers. Big fan of Slavoj Zizek, Christopher Hitchens, special place in my heart for Althusser.

Unfortunately, being a former Catholic, I also recognize herd-like tendency being possible with any group, and as such refuse to join a political party, silly little groups like the ISO or CPUSA are annoying to me for many reasons. As an atheist, I also challenge the Socialist Holies constantly in my arguments and don't mind being disliked over it.

Am I looking to be hated? No, but I also refuse to not state the obvious on certain issues and state my opinions based on facts, as opposed to being called a troll or neo-con. I laugh at that concept, I am farthest from a Conservative.

[Veovis]

I'm curious. What criteria does a socialist organization have to meet in order for you not to consider it "silly?"

[Azraella]

Organizing into groups is revolutionary. That is all

[The Jay]

Welcome to the forum. I'm not sure what you mean by socialist "holies" but I think that you have the wrong idea about how this forum operates. Sure, there's sectarian disagreements but the point of the fighting is to build consensus and sway in-betweeners. It's a good thing, I think.

[Azraella]

I'm not sure what you mean by socialist "holies"


I'm assuming Stew is referring to religious socialists.

[Book O'Dead]

Like others here, I too am curious about these "socialist holies".

Many people have confused their atheism with socialism and viceversa. As I see it, Socialism, or more specifically, Marxism has nothing to do with militant atheism. In fact, I view atheism as a downright impediment to reaching workers who are ripe for socialist enlightment but who still hold fast to their core beliefs regarding the supernatural. It is an impediment because it is impolitic and arrogant of its supposed intellectual superiority.

Also, I deem militant atheism as insulting to the memory of thousands of religious peoples throughout history who fought and, in many cases, died for the cause of social justice.

[The Jay]

In fact, I view atheism as a downright impediment to reaching workers who are ripe for socialist enlightment but who still hold fast to their core beliefs regarding the supernatural. It is an impediment because it is impolitic and arrogant of its supposed intellectual superiority.
I deem militant atheism as insulting to the memory of thousands of religious peoples throughout history who fought and, in many cases, died for the cause of social justice.

The arrogance that you seem to attribute to atheists, I think, is due to mistaking sureness of a contrary position. The same can be said of theists who view atheists as deluded. That said, "militant" atheism, which is really just outspoken atheism, may be said to hinder evangelization of socialism, due to the current religious current in the U.S., particularly the south. The merits of this claim should be discussed in another thread.

As to your statement calling outspoken atheism an insult to the dead, I'll note that they are dead and can't care about anything. Their accomplishments are real and should be upheld, but no-one should be silenced because some dead people would have disagreed with them.

[Book O'Dead]

The arrogance that you seem to attribute to atheists, I think, is due to mistaking sureness of a contrary position. The same can be said of theists who view atheists as deluded. That said, "militant" atheism, which is really just outspoken atheism, may be said to hinder evangelization of socialism, due to the current religious current in the U.S., particularly the south. The merits of this claim should be discussed in another thread.



As to your statement calling outspoken atheism an insult to the dead, I'll note that they are dead and can't care about anything. Their accomplishments are real and should be upheld, but no-one should be silenced because some dead people would have disagreed with them.

Read it again. L.S., I wrote "an insult to the memory" of religious people who fought for liberation, not to the people themselves who, as you corrctly state, are beyond caring.

Also, I am not advocating silencing anyone, unless they are fascists and racists using religion to promote their brand of hatred, or if they use religion to hide their reactionary agendas. In which case they should be exposed and destroyed (figuratively speaking).

My main argument is that it is wrong for socialists to go after the beliefs of religious people as the outspoken atheists like Dawkins and Bill Mahr do because, for one thing, Socialism does not concern itself with matters of spiritual faith; it doesn't waste good ammo to shoot crows.

It's like the standard sophism militant religious people use to counter evolutionary sciences: "Science cannot disprove the existence of God." To which one can comfortably reply: "I doesn't have to, God is beyond science."

[ZeroNowhere]

I'm assuming Stew is referring to religious socialists.
I took it as more akin to saying, 'Hur, I'm not a Marxist dinosaur'; that is, anti-dogmatic posturing.

[GatesofLenin]

I'm an atheist and a newbie-Marxist myself, how do you expect to start anything if you refuse to join up?

[The Jay]

My main argument is that it is wrong for socialists to go after the beliefs of religious people as the outspoken atheists like Dawkins and Bill Mahr do because, for one thing, Socialism does not concern itself with matters of spiritual faith; it doesn't waste good ammo to shoot crows.

It's like the standard sophism militant religious people use to counter evolutionary sciences: "Science cannot disprove the existence of God." To which one can comfortably reply: "I doesn't have to, God is beyond science."

Socialism is not a lifestyle and has no bearing on religious belief, at least from my understanding. However hard one fights for a particular viewpoint, it does not change their economic position. You're treating aggressive debating as one would an assault. Why should any position be safe? Marx encouraged dialectical critiques of everything, why not religion?

All the best,
LiquidState

[Azraella]

Actually. I might be deeply religious but I'm still a commie. There have been numerous attempts to convince me that I was wrong. And I still believe. Heh.
Free thanked posts for everyone. :)

[The Jay]

Actually. I might be deeply religious but I'm still a commie. There have been numerous attempts to convince me that I was wrong. And I still believe. Heh.
Free thanked posts for everyone. :)

Thank you and enjoy religiosity!

[tfb]

Motherfuck a memory.

How about "defending religion is support for the memory of the millions of religious people who fought against social justice"? A bloo bloo bloo! :crying:

There were (deluded) people who believed in capitalism and yet fought against racism and homophobia. Is it a (oh, my eyes are welling up!) insult to their memories if you complain about capitalism in *gasp* public like a "militant atheist" does with religion? Pfffffffffft.

[ZeroNowhere]

Free thanked posts for everyone. :)
Is this the religious equivalent of horizontal recruitment?

[Azraella]

Thank you and enjoy religiosity!

No problem. :)


Is this the religious equivalent of horizontal recruitment?

Actually nope. Generosity is one of the Nine Noble Virtues after all ;)

[Franz Fanonipants]

Why are you a fan of Chris Hitchens, comrade? Other than his atheism, the guy pretty much is on record as being a fan of American Imperial power.

e: which isn't to say that atheism and american imperialism are unconnected cus case in point comrade.

[Stew312856]

Why are you a fan of Chris Hitchens, comrade? Other than his atheism, the guy pretty much is on record as being a fan of American Imperial power.

e: which isn't to say that atheism and american imperialism are unconnected cus case in point comrade.

I respect Hitchens because his predictions on Iraq in 2003 came true, if you watch a debate he had on Democracy Now he nailed it when he said that a religious civil war would break out if the US bungled this thing (which they did).

Now, I opposed the war for a variety of reasons, and I still think our policy sucks, but I would enquire as to why sending troops to battle a Fascist dictator power was OK in 1936 with Spain but not with Iraq? The people of Iraq hated Sadaam, there was an international refugee community working towards liberating Iraq (though they were ignored by Bush), and the Human Rights Watch wasn't exactly sending laurels to Baghdad. No one voted for Franco, no one voted in the Baath Party. Franco massacred his opponents and dissidents, so did Sadaam. Not saying the 'good fight' and this ongoing quagmire should be totally compared, but I find striking parallels.

[Obs]

I respect Hitchens because his predictions on Iraq in 2003 came true, if you watch a debate he had on Democracy Now he nailed it when he said that a religious civil war would break out if the US bungled this thing (which they did).
I don't understand this part of your post. First you say his prediction was right, then you point out exactly where he was wrong.

[Ocean Seal]

I'm assuming Stew is referring to religious socialists.
I think that he is referring to people that the socialists uphold ie: Marx Engels and so on.

[Zealot]

I respect Hitchens because his predictions on Iraq in 2003 came true, if you watch a debate he had on Democracy Now he nailed it when he said that a religious civil war would break out if the US bungled this thing (which they did).

Now, I opposed the war for a variety of reasons, and I still think our policy sucks, but I would enquire as to why sending troops to battle a Fascist dictator power was OK in 1936 with Spain but not with Iraq? The people of Iraq hated Sadaam, there was an international refugee community working towards liberating Iraq (though they were ignored by Bush), and the Human Rights Watch wasn't exactly sending laurels to Baghdad. No one voted for Franco, no one voted in the Baath Party. Franco massacred his opponents and dissidents, so did Sadaam. Not saying the 'good fight' and this ongoing quagmire should be totally compared, but I find striking parallels.

Did you just compare the Iraq invasion to the Spanish Civil War? Oh hell no...

It was an imperialist war through and through, Sadam would have played no role in their intentions apart from being good propaganda. Whether or not the people liked him is debatable but they sure as hell would rather have Sadam than imperialists plundering their country. They would have eventually toppled Sadam by themselves if he was that bad, as you can see now with the so-called Arab Spring. Actually the Arab Spring would arguably have happened earlier, if he was as bad as you say, thus saving more lives. The middle east is now basically one giant American military and imperialist base, and you can bet they'll start expanding through Asia sooner or later. I find no reason to give the slightest support for this.

[Stew312856]

Whether or not the people liked him is debatable but they sure as hell would rather have Sadam than imperialists plundering their country.

Not debatable, a multi-national, multi-ethnic Iraqi refugee community testifies to this. At the end of Gulf War I, GW Bush and Co (including several prominent Cabinet members in Jr's hunting party) allowed a viable rebel movement to be slaughtered by Sadaam, as testified to in various histories of that CNN conflict. The political and moral suppression by Sadaam was real, though I won't disagree with you that this also was Imperialist War Games by its very nature, all about oil.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Not saying the 'good fight' and this ongoing quagmire should be totally compared, but I find striking parallels.

imperialist dog

[Stew312856]

Hey Franz, quit being a chicken shit and say whatever you want to say to me in a message, you coward. Comparing histories does not make me an imperialist.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Hey Franz, quit being a chicken shit and say whatever you want to say to me in a message, you coward. Comparing histories does not make me an imperialist.

The public forum aspect of this deal is actually the non-chickenshit option

[FaisalYorkshireanarchist]

haha, funny to see some jumped up, so -called 'socialist' arguing pointlessly about religion. Ill bet my bottom dollar that you are about as far from working class as you can get. Studying marx, you say? Do mummy and daddy pay for your education, with their comfortable middle class jobs in the city?? You said in your post that you wont shy away from speaking your mind, well, neither will I, you sir are an idiot, if you were truly a socialist why badmouth socialist organisations, who truly try their best to help enlighten the working class, over some mind-numbingly boring ridiculously insignificant intellectual point, just so you can feel better than the rest of us, that your somehow 'in the know'. pathetic.