Do you have to agree with Karl Marx's views on religion/atheism/God to believe in Soc

[tradeunionsupporter]

Do you have to agree with Karl Marx's views on religion/atheism/God to believe in Socialism/Marxism/Communism ? I know Jews Christians and Muslims who would support Socialism but they disagree with Marxism's views on religion. My question do you have to agree with everything Karl Marx said to be a Marxist ? How do Islamic Marxists or Christian Communists claim to be Marxists and Theists do they just disagree with Marxism's views on religion ?

Christian communism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christian communism can be seen as a radical (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Christian_radicalism) form of Christian socialism (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Christian_socialism). Christian communists may or may not agree with various parts of Marxism (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Marxism). They generally do not agree with the antireligious views held by secular Marxists, but do agree with many of the economic and existential aspects of Marxist theory, such as the idea that capitalism (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Capitalism) exploits the working class (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Working_class) by extracting surplus value (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Surplus_value) from the workers in the form of profits (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Profit_(economics)) and that wage-labor (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Wage-labor) is a tool of human alienation (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Social_alienation) that promotes arbitrary and unjust authority. Christian communism, like Marxism, also holds that capitalism encourages the negative aspects of human nature, supplanting values such as mercy, kindness, justice and compassion in favor of greed, selfishness and blind ambition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism

[Drowzy_Shooter]

No, just look at my profile picture.

[tradeunionsupporter]

Thank you.

[Ostrinski]

You can be a socialist and religious, as there are non-Marxian socialist currents, but to be a Marxist you must have a materialistic philosophical outlook. Without the materialist conception of history there is no Marxism.


No, just look at my profile picture.This doesn't mean shit. What if I had a Hitler avatar and still called myself a socialist?

[Ballyfornia]

Believe what the fuck you want

[REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL]

You can be a socialist and religious, as there are non-Marxian socialist currents, but to be a Marxist you must have a materialistic philosophical outlook. Without the materialist conception of history there is no Marxism.

This doesn't mean shit. What if I had a Hitler avatar and still called myself a socialist?

What does the "materialist conception of history" have to with whether or not a god exists exactly?

[Ostrinski]

The spiritual realm, and all things that are not material, are incompatible with materialist philosophy.

[GoddessCleoLover]

I agree that one's religious beliefs are a private matter and that a real workers' democracy will be sensitive to this issue. Religion is another issue where Communist party-led governments too often took a heavy-handed approach.

[CommunityBeliever]

You can believe in both religion and socialism. Just don't work to bring your religion into the science classroom. Some creationists teach children that the Earth is only 6,000 years old despite evidence from radiocarbon dating. That sort of indoctrination is unacceptable.

[Caj]

to be a Marxist you must have a materialistic philosophical outlook. Without the materialist conception of history there is no Marxism.

The "materialism" in historical materialism is not the same as philosophical/metaphysical materialism. The world could be partially immaterial and the materialist conception of history could still be correct.

[Ostrinski]

The "materialism" in historical materialism is not the same as philosophical/metaphysical materialism. The world could be partially immaterial and the materialist conception of history could still be correct.How does that even make sense? I mean I agree, I probably should have just said materialism and not historical materialism, but how perceive non-material things is a reflection of our material situation and economic activity.

[Drowzy_Shooter]

This doesn't mean shit. What if I had a Hitler avatar and still called myself a socialist?

Then you'd be restricted :cool:

[Caj]

Then you'd be restricted :cool:

Wouldn't you be banned?

[Ostrinski]

Wouldn't you be banned?Hopefully.

But alas, there are many people in OI that refer to themselves as socialists so that point doesn't really stand.

[Drowzy_Shooter]

Wouldn't you be banned?


I would be banned? Or would he be banned?

Idk, though you're probably right if it's the second thing. A hitler avatar would swing down the hammer on you pretty quickly.

[workersadvocate]

Heck with the avatars, etc...
What do you stand for?
Whose side are you on?
What are you gonna do about it?

[NoMasters]

Absolutely.

However, he viewed religion as being a controlling substance on the masses (opium).

He didn't have an understanding of religion like Leo Tolsoy did. So yes I do agree in the way he views religion. But that isn't the only way religion can be seen.

[TheGeekySocialist]

I would argue that moderate religious belief is compatible but that more extreme religious views probably aren't.

[REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL]

How does that even make sense? I mean I agree, I probably should have just said materialism and not historical materialism, but how perceive non-material things is a reflection of our material situation and economic activity.

Wat.

Seriously, what. I don't even get your point because the way I interpret it doesn't even make sense? So religiousity is an indicator of what, a unworking class materialist situation or something and that means you can't be a communist?

Please clarify as obviously the above point isn't very strong.

[Stalin Ate My Homework]

What you believe in is up to you. Marxism gives a good analysis of the role of religion in Capitalist society, but you can still be religious and reject the reactionary aspects of organised religion so I see no reason why you cannot also be a Marxist.

[RGacky3]

The spiritual realm, and all things that are not material, are incompatible with materialist philosophy.


You can have a materialist concept of history and have a non materialist ontology, those are 2 seperate things.

Also you can absolutely be a Marxist, when your talking economics, and reject his atheism.

[blake 3:17]

The "materialism" in historical materialism is not the same as philosophical/metaphysical materialism. The world could be partially immaterial and the materialist conception of history could still be correct.

One can accept most basic ideas around truth, science, history and fact, without rejecting most religious beliefs.

And as the post I'm quoting from asserts there are different materialisms. To try to reduce one to another is one of the worst mistakes Marxists can make.

[artanis17]

To be a consistent Marxist it is good to agree with most of the MAIN points Marx has shown. Religion is one of them. Religions contradict with the idea of communism no matter what.

Religion is always open for abuse. Religious masses can be easily provoked. Religion divides people. Religion is dogmatic. Religion ignites fanaticism. Every single religion claims to possess truth, in the end clash between religions is inevitable unless they are eliminated. %90 Of the time one person's religious believes are defined by his family. In order to choose religion yourself you need to go through so many beliefs.. Religion s a pre-communist era rubbish. Religion is opium of people. End of story.

To be consistent go atheism. You will feel good. :thumbup1:

[NGNM85]

Do you have to agree with Karl Marx's views on religion/atheism/God to believe in Socialism/Marxism/Communism ?

You don't, necessarily, have to agree with Marx's views on religion to be a Socialist, or a Communist. You probably have to agree with his views on religion, in order to be a Marxist.


I know Jews Christians and Muslims who would support Socialism but they disagree with Marxism's views on religion. My question do you have to agree with everything Karl Marx said to be a Marxist ?

Not necessarily. However; to describe oneself as a 'Marxist', implies you embrace the lion's share of it.


How do Islamic Marxists or Christian Communists claim to be Marxists and Theists do they just disagree with Marxism's views on religion ?


You'd have to ask them.

[RGacky3]

Religion is always open for abuse. Religious masses can be easily provoked. Religion divides people. Religion is dogmatic. Religion ignites fanaticism. Every single religion claims to possess truth, in the end clash between religions is inevitable unless they are eliminated. %90 Of the time one person's religious believes are defined by his family. In order to choose religion yourself you need to go through so many beliefs.. Religion s a pre-communist era rubbish. Religion is opium of people. End of story.

To be consistent go atheism. You will feel good. http://www.revleft.com/vb/do-you-have-t167470/revleft/smilies2/thumbup1.gif

Replace "religion" with "politics."

Of coarse every religion claims truth, so does every political theory.

Point is there is NOTHING contradictory between most religion and communism, just like there is NOTHING contradictory between "politics" and communism (as you see its meaningless).

[Rooster]

To be a Marxist you have to understand things like alienation and fetishism of certain rituals/objects/etc. So I don't think you can truly be religious and truly be a Marxist at the same time. Something has to give at one point.

[Ostrinski]

You can have a materialist concept of history and have a non materialist ontology, those are 2 seperate things.

Also you can absolutely be a Marxist, when your talking economics, and reject his atheism.I shouldn't have used historical materialism in my post, I agree. But metaphysics is incompatible with materialism as a philosophy still.

And yes, you can have a Marxian analysis of capitalism, but it doesn't mean you're a Marxist.

[Blake's Baby]

So, what a Marxist?

Someone who accepts the Marxist interpretation of capitalism?
Someone who accepts the thrust of historical materialism?
Someone who accepts the necessity of the dictatorship of the proletariat?
Someone who believes that the working class carries the future of humanity within it, and there's no Magic Man to make it better?

Marxism in the end probably isn't incompatible with religion, per se, but it is incompatible with the belief in a higher power that is both omnipotent and benevolent (as is all rationalist inquiry, as demonstrated in about 300BC by Epicurus - nice little summing up here - http://atheism.about.com/od/argumentsagainstgod/a/EvilSuffering.htm ).

[Ostrinski]

That Epicurus quote is stupid. It assumes that there is a universal conception of good and evil, instead of the perceptions of good and evil being reflective upon their historical context.

[Grenzer]

I agree with Brospierre, Epicurean philosophy really isn't a good thing to set as a Marxist standard. It's really more like vulgar materialism than anything else.

[runequester]

Bukharin had a few things to say on this:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1920/abc/11.htm#089


Many weak-kneed communists reason as follows: 'Religion does not prevent my being a communist. I believe both in God and in communism. My faith in God does not hinder me from fighting for the cause of the proletarian revolution.'

This train of thought is radically false. Religion and communism are incompatible, both theoretically and practically.

Every communist must regard social phenomena (the relationships between human beings, revolutions, wars, etc.) as processes which occur in accordance with definite laws. The laws of social development have been fully established by scientific communism on the basis of the theory of historical materialism which we owe to our great teachers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. This theory explains that social development is not brought about by any kind of supernatural forces. Nay more. The same theory has demonstrated that the very idea of God and of supernatural powers arises at a definite stage in human history, and at another definite stage begins to disappear as a childish notion which finds no confirmation in practical life and in the struggle between man and nature. But it is profitable to the predatory class to maintain the ignorance of the people and to maintain the people's childish belief in miracles (the key to the riddle really lies in the exploiters' pockets), and this is why religious prejudices are so tenacious, and why they confuse the minds even of persons who are in other respects able.


That being said, in the present day and age, thought has generally evolved to
Private religion is fine
Public religion (i.e. organised religion) is not, as it is almost inevitably aligned with the forces of capital.

[RGacky3]

But metaphysics is incompatible with materialism as a philosophy still.


Ontological Materialism IS a form of metaphysics.


And yes, you can have a Marxian analysis of capitalism, but it doesn't mean you're a Marxist.

I suppose, I use Marxian analysis heavily, but I don't consider myself a Marxist, but thats kind of arbitrary.


Public religion (i.e. organised religion) is not, as it is almost inevitably aligned with the forces of capital.

Thats not true at all. Infact the very nature of most abrahamic religions is communal rather than personal, i.e. the church, the temple and so on.

[runequester]

Thats not true at all. Infact the very nature of most abrahamic religions is communal rather than personal, i.e. the church, the temple and so on.

This is true on a personal level, however, religion has been intertwined with politics since basically the creation of the nation state. The church has traditionally aligned itself with the state for political influence. This happens even today of course.

So we are back at personal versus public.

[RGacky3]

The church has traditionally aligned itself with the state for political influence. This happens even today of course.


Sure, but there is not "the church," obviously everyone should be against religion having anything to do with the political sphere, both for the good of religion and the political sphere.

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

Put succinctly, you cannot believe in a non-material, supernatural higher power and be a Marxist. This kind of belief is antithetical to dialectical materialism which is at the core of Marx's theory. Could you be some kind of socialist and believe in the supernatural (i.e., god)? Depends on how you define "socialist." The way I define it, no.

The idea of "personal" religion is ultimately an extension of the Reformation. Where people rejected the institution of the Catholic Church for a more personal christianity. It was an appropriate religion for the emerging bourgeoisie. It was progressive at the time, but ceased to be long ago.

[hatzel]

dialectical materialism which is at the core of Marx's theory

I feel it's worth mentioning that this is a questionable statement in and of itself. Without even addressing the reality of non-dialectical Marxists and whether or not they would then remain 'true' Marxists.

[daft punk]

The "materialism" in historical materialism is not the same as philosophical/metaphysical materialism. The world could be partially immaterial and the materialist conception of history could still be correct.

in what way? Marxism is based on materialism which is a major strand of philosophy, but he refined it by adding the dialectics and the role of the subjective factor - the ability of people to influence the world around them.

To answer the OP - you can be a Marxist and have a faith, loads of people joined the Bolsheviks who were Muslim for example. But organised religion tends to be incompatible with socialism. It depends on whether the religious leaders back the revolution or counter-revolution I suppose. The Bolsheviks were clear that religions would only be persecuted if they aided the enemy.

[Comrade Auldnik]

I believe a characteristic of socialist consciousness is the abandoning of idealism, which includes supernatural and metaphysical conceptions of the universe.

[Comrade Auldnik]

I feel it's worth mentioning that this is a questionable statement in and of itself. Without even addressing the reality of non-dialectical Marxists and whether or not they would then remain 'true' Marxists.

There's hardly any question that dialectical materialism is at the core of Marxist philosophy. In fact, I'm going to take the risk and say that anyone who does not embrace dialectical materialism cannot be considered a true Marxist. This isn't to say they wouldn't be influenced by Marx's revolutionary theory though, and please don't make the mistake of thinking I want to put down my comrades who have yet to integrate dialectic into their worldview.

[Azraella]

Well...

I think the issue is generally more complex than what people are saying here. To be brutally honest, I disagree with Marx's and Bakunin's views on religion and I especially disagree with the idea that religion will shrivel and die after a socialist revolution. That said, most religious socialists aren't even Marxist, they're more likely to be anarchists or just plain "Christian communists" and such with a leaning towards libertarian socialism and democratic socialism with a rejection of an organized church.

[Ostrinski]

Ontological Materialism IS a form of metaphysics.Isn't that kind of a paradox? Materialists aren't concerned with the question of being, or anything that transcends the material realm.


I suppose, I use Marxian analysis heavily, but I don't consider myself a Marxist, but thats kind of arbitrary.I agree. Hardline theoretical consistency is of little relevance to actual developments. I was hesitant to even post in this thread.

[RGacky3]

Isn't that kind of a paradox? Materialists aren't concerned with the question of being, or anything that transcends the material realm.


Materialism is the claim that all that exists is matter and energy, that is a metaphysical position. I'm talking about ontological materialism, not historical materialism (2 very different things).

BTW, I forget his name, but I remember hearing a philosopher (Van Fraassen) talk about why ontologically empiricism is the more rational view, considering materialism is a structural claim, the early materialism which lead to all sorts of philisophical conclusions was crushed by quantum physics. Whereas empiricism is a epistemelogical claim that the you learn what is through the senses, but it does'nt tell WHAT is.

Mixing up ontological materialism with historical materialism is rediculous and will lead you too all sorts of fallacies.

If you don't care about ontological issues, thats fine, but don't claim that historical materialism necessitates ontological materialism.


That said, most religious socialists aren't even Marxist, they're more likely to be anarchists or just plain "Christian communists" and such with a leaning towards libertarian socialism and democratic socialism with a rejection of an organized church.

Before Marx almost all socialists were religious, and were socialists DUE to religious convictions, no in spite of them.


Put succinctly, you cannot believe in a non-material, supernatural higher power and be a Marxist. This kind of belief is antithetical to dialectical materialism which is at the core of Marx's theory. Could you be some kind of socialist and believe in the supernatural (i.e., god)? Depends on how you define "socialist." The way I define it, no.


Dialectical Materialism, as used by Marx IS NOT AN ONTOLOGICAL PHILOSOPHY.

Its a historical philosophy and a method of historical analysis.


I believe a characteristic of socialist consciousness is the abandoning of idealism, which includes supernatural and metaphysical conceptions of the universe.

Again, Ontological vrs Historical materialism/idealism.

[NoMasters]

No. Some of the greatest anarcho-socialists like Leo Tolstoy were religious.

Marx was referring clearly to his view on religion at the time and place, which still hold true today.

So no, most likely you cannot but. But there are VERY FEW exceptions.