Nationalizing church property and teaching atheism in school

[CynicalIdealist]

Are these methods of combating religion still relevant to the theory of "transition" to communism today, or are they too harsh, especially in the modern period where religious superstition is far less predominant?

And can somebody clarify the history of how state socialist regimes have combated religion, specifically Lenin? I've heard that there's a long history of oppression of religion in socialist states but I've never known specifically what this entailed. I know that Lenin didn't suppress religion as much in the Central Asian republics for some reason, but my knowledge is pretty rough.

I've also heard some say that church property "should be nationalized, except for the church building." What is church property aside from the building? Money? Bank accounts? And why not go to greater lengths to suppress the church if it's a source of indoctrination?

Also, in a transition period, would it make more sense to teach secularism or atheism today?

I'd like to hear different thoughts on this.

[rundontwalk]

All forcing atheism would do is guarantee certain areas of the world will never go communist. Like the US South, Saudi Arabia, or wherever.

[Ocean Seal]

You don't teach atheism. You teach science, evolution, and the empirical. You can't really teach atheism or secularism. Secularism is a consequence of material conditions. And yes, church property should be nationalized.

[Belleraphone]

I don't know much about how socialists have combated religion, but I would say that teaching atheism in school is unnecessary. Religious people, who may also happen to be communist, may react to this negatively and join the reactionaries, which could be harmful to our cause. Capitalism needs to be destroyed with actively, but over time religion will fade away or turn into some abstract spiritual movement that doesn't teach others to hate each other but instead has you run naked through the forest.

Church property? Do you mean the catholic church or just a regular church? I don't know about the latter but the former the catholic church has the actual places of worship, cathedrals, summer camps, missionaries, schools, and hospitals and other buildings dedicated to charity. Don't forget the Vatican itself either. I would say that nationalizing their places of worship is not needed, it's a place of worship and not a means of production, so there's really no benefit to taking it that I can see. If the church does have any factories or other MOP, then yes, obviously they should be nationalized.

[CommieTroll]

The case of the Orthodox Religion in pre-Soviet Russia is different to religious institutions in other ''Socialist'' states. The Orthodox Church held a lot of political power in Tsarist Russia and held a lot of land and wealth, and Lenin never seemed to forget the fate of his elder brother at the hands of Tsarist brutality. Take Rasputin for example, he was a big influence over Tsarina Alexandra while Nicholas III was away at the front during WWI and influenced major government decisions. These were a few of the factors that led to the suppression of the Russian Orthodox Church under the Soviet regime

[Yuppie Grinder]

but over time religion will fade away or turn into some abstract spiritual movement that doesn't teach others to hate each other but instead has you run naked through the forest.

I laughed. Religion doesn't seem all that bad when it's just hippies being silly.

[Belleraphone]

Yeah, I think it's just people wanting to be part of something bigger but not wanting to promote hate so it's a compromise.

[GPDP]

You don't "teach" atheism. Modern-day religiosity is a phenomenon borne of material conditions, namely poverty, inequality, and alienation. Notice how the wealthier, more egalitarian countries (chiefly those in Western and Northern Europe) have many more people who consider themselves atheists than in more impoverished, unequal countries, where religion plays a big role in peoples' lives.

That said, the US is a unique player in this dynamic, in that it retains extremely high levels of religiosity among its population despite it being the wealthiest country on earth. This, however, I would argue to be a function of the extreme wealth disparity in that country. That there is a concerted effort by the far-right politically to propagate fundamentalist beliefs also does not help matters.

In the end, I think the best approach is simply to enforce strict secularism rather than force feed atheism to people. A socialist society would provide the material conditions that would stifle religiosity largely on its own.