The Great Crusade (Reds! Part 3)

[Nyvis]

The fact that you a fellow communist (as I am.) Say that religion is an oppressive pack of lies and is best left in the dustbin of history makes me question if my political beliefs are akin to a rich black chieftain supporting Aparthied. Why must communism consider religion superstition and a enemy reactionary force? Did we not end infanticide, the colosseum, and lead the Abolition movement? Did the Buddhist not end human sacrifice in China and Japan. I wondered if my comrades in Marxism would stab religious progressives in the back. I am sickened that the answer may be yes. Certainly there are religious reactionaries. But is not saying all religion is reactionary akin to saying all ethnic group x are a bunch of x?

The problem isn't faith per se. It's both organized religion and the extremely toxic idea that faith let you dictate other people's action. Sadly, this is the way most organized religious groups run. Religion has been used to prop up class rule through the times so it's to be expected to have some level of backlash. I don't think the UASR really care about your faith, just participation in structures that would subvert what they are trying to build. I doubt they bother prosecuting people for any of that unless they're explicitly part of a reactionary organization taking action against the revolution, either.

After all, Norman Thomas is the martyr of the revolution.

I imagine progressive religious groups that sided with the revolution also get a pass in public opinion as long as they're not too vocal and don't try to bring religion into government. Things like liberation theology is likely to be a lot more welcome than a catholic church whose pope condemned America, for example.

 

[Shevek23]

The fact that you a fellow communist (as I am.) Say that religion is an oppressive pack of lies and is best left in the dustbin of history

I don't think I said that was my position and still less that I think it's objectively true. I don't believe in God much nowadays, but it is possible for people to believe things that aren't true without being liars, and still more when we are dealing with something like religion.

Religion touches on a dimension of human experience rather different than the world as approached from a rational angle after all. "Not rational" does not necessarily equate to "bogus." There is a mythic side of human consciousness, clearly.

One thing that is a marker of modern fundamentalism--Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Vedic, whatever--is that people seem to have lost sight of the distinction between Mythos and Logos. To a Christian fundamentalist, Christianity can't be true unless the Bible is literally true. But many other people have been able to accommodate the idea that a myth that is not literally true nevertheless is saying something worthwhile. I had a nun in Catholic school suggest that "the Bible teaches how to go to heaven and not how the heavens go." There are layers and layers of this kind of nuance available. But one aspect of capitalist society is that it gives a really hard workout to develop scientific rationality and engineering competence--a massive reliance on Logos. And Mythos is pretty much left in the archives, gathering dust. Apologists for "Western Civilization" often pat it on the back for morality and ethics and so forth, but I think it is plain that what European civilization really excelled at was technology, and this relates to capitalist organization--capitalism means that the workplace becomes the owner of means of production's playground; before this productive activity was something that the oppressed workers pretty much worked out how to do by themselves, the overlords then just came and took a big tribute from the loot and rode off again. Capitalism involves the exploiter in the productive process, as director, and therefore engages all sorts of analytic energies that formerly were available only to waging war as a game. It was then I think the transformation to capitalism that elevated science up to the level of a separate discipline eventually branching into a whole family of them, and made engineering a respectable study and not just something dirty mechanics did. Fundamentalist religions then bring back a limited, one-sided view of human experience and attempt to encompass the basically mythic work of religion in that frame.

But meanwhile, starved or otherwise, the mythic aspect of the mind continues to exist and to shape our actions. This is why even if I were presented with final and undoubtable proof that God does not exist, and their is no mystical dimension to reality whatsoever, I still would not ever say "religion is just a bunch of lies." Religion, even if scientifically false, is an attempt to understand our lives from a mythic angle. Even if they are nothing but stories, these remain interesting stories worth telling and musing on.

As it happens, I have long ago lost any sense I could kid myself into believing in some kind of loving divinity that will make things all right for sure in the sweet bye and bye. But neither have I stumbled upon that disproof, that final stake in the heart of all hope, if that is what it is, that I might actually find God after all some day. There are as I said plenty of atheists who do take that next step and say "you know what, religion is actually a bad thing, it's no good, it is just a bunch of bloodsucking lies." Such talk was common in the 19th century by the way, not just among Marxists but pretty commonplace to the entire leftist tradition.

But that's not me, and my point is, being a Red does not (not the way I see it anyway) categorically demand one must denounce and revile religion. It certainly has been associated with lots of people who have in fact denounced and reviled religion, and these people very often have plain reasons one certainly has to respect for their sincerity to hold such strong views. But from where I stand, I don't see how a categorical rejection of any kind of belief in God is a logical requirement for accepting a Marxist analysis of how things work here on Earth and what to do about it. Certainly many orthodoxies have demanded on their side that the faithful must reject Marxism, but I notice a lot of people take orthodoxy with a grain of salt.

 

[Richard Osborne]

I don't think I said that was my position and still less that I think it's objectively true. I don't believe in God much nowadays, but it is possible for people to believe things that aren't true without being liars, and still more when we are dealing with something like religion.

Religion touches on a dimension of human experience rather different than the world as approached from a rational angle after all. "Not rational" does not necessarily equate to "bogus." There is a mythic side of human consciousness, clearly.

One thing that is a marker of modern fundamentalism--Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Vedic, whatever--is that people seem to have lost sight of the distinction between Mythos and Logos. To a Christian fundamentalist, Christianity can't be true unless the Bible is literally true. But many other people have been able to accommodate the idea that a myth that is not literally true nevertheless is saying something worthwhile. I had a nun in Catholic school suggest that "the Bible teaches how to go to heaven and not how the heavens go." There are layers and layers of this kind of nuance available. But one aspect of capitalist society is that it gives a really hard workout to develop scientific rationality and engineering competence--a massive reliance on Logos. And Mythos is pretty much left in the archives, gathering dust. Apologists for "Western Civilization" often pat it on the back for morality and ethics and so forth, but I think it is plain that what European civilization really excelled at was n their side that the faithful must reject Marxism, but I notice a lot of people take orthodoxy with a grain of salt.

thank you for clarifying.

 

[Yama951]

One must recall that religious communism/socialism existed before the rise of Stalinism as the preeminent communist ideology.

While the USSR would be really pushing for the persecution especially in the early years, I can see the UASR being more open to more socialist versions of the religions. Liberation theology would likely be supported and promoted among the Latin American Catholics despite the Vatican's stance against it.

I am curious about the Philippines' communist insurgents ITTL. IOTL, they're Maoist-Stalinist in ideology but I can see the insurgent group being more on the American style of communism, especially seeing the switch for British protection instead of direct independence when the Second American Civil War happened as a kind of bourgeois betrayal. IOTL, the communist insurgents are called the longest running communist insurgency in the world.

 

[Bookmark1995]

Wasn't Norman Thomas, the Lenin of the UASR, a Presbyterian Preacher?

This was a man who was guided by a genuine belief in the kingdom of God. Consider the nature of this man and his tragic end, I doubt there won't be people who bring that up. That could really be a weapon against the really, anti-clerical forces of the UASR, that their unofficial founding father was a man whose love for the people was born from his belief in serving God.

 

[Nyvis]

Wasn't Norman Thomas, the Lenin of the UASR, a Presbyterian Preacher?

This was a man who was guided by a genuine belief in the kingdom of God. Consider the nature of this man and his tragic end, I doubt there won't be people who bring that up. That could really be a weapon against the really, anti-clerical forces of the UASR, that their unofficial founding father was a man whose love for the people was born from his belief in serving God.

Anticlerical doesn't have to mean antireligious. Religious hierarchy probably has to go, since the very large majority of it participates in propping up reactionary power structures. Religious people, though? There's no real reason to hit back against them in general. Same with more grassroot movements. Historically, the most anticlerical movements tended to happen in countries with massive reactionary church hierarchies like pre-revolution France.

 

[Bookmark1995]

Anticlerical doesn't have to mean antireligious. Religious hierarchy probably has to go, since the very large majority of it participates in propping up reactionary power structures. Religious people, though? There's no real reason to hit back against them in general. Same with more grassroot movements. Historically, the most anticlerical movements tended to happen in countries with massive reactionary church hierarchies like pre-revolution France.

Still, Thomas' religious background will be something taught to generations of Red American children, which will teach them that religion, as long as it is not a tool of oppressors, is a perfectly fine thing.

 

[Imladrik]

The USAR is a dystopia for religious people. The author stated in another thread that the USAR is majority atheist and religion is going extinct in the Comintern and socially discouraged. Thus since all of eastern Europe is communist it seems inevitable that Eastern Orthodox Christianity will die killing one of the oldest Christian denominations.

How is that dystopic ? The Orthodox church is historically one of the most oppresive organisation church in christianity, especially for it's size. It dying would be a positive good.

Chinese traditional culture and spirituality and Japanese culture and Korean culture are likely dead. Wiped out for being "regressive". Russian Culture has likely been replaced by a Soviet Culture. Other minority cultures and art in the Soviet Union. Religion is one so quintessential to many traditional cultures that removing religion likely kills the culture.

Bullshit. Religion is but a small part of these cultures. Korean folk religion is basically dead (16% practitionner in South Korea) due to proselytism of the christian churches and the Kim regime, and no one think that there is no Korean culture. Chinese culture is not dying at all (despite pretty harsh measures on religion) and neither is the Japanese one when most of them are irreligious (because for them shintoism isn't a religion as it isn't organized).

I love all the social and economic and freedom progress made by the reds and I am a Marxist-syndicalist but the fact that the leftist utopia includes the death of religion as a positive.....I wonder if I can trust my fellow leftist or if a knife is aimed at my peoples back. I hope not but hearing how my fellow leftist talk about religion....I just don't know.

Religion evolved from faith which is basically the various explanations humans found to things they didn't understood. Don't understand thunder ? Well some sky dude did it. And then you form a hierarchy which creates religious law, which creates oppression. That is the reason most communists don't like religion : it is because it is a tool of social control. Abrahamic religions created a whole set of laws that oppressed a part of the population (non believers, women, etc) that is a core set of their belief. Others like the Dharmic religions are some of the most efficient tools of social controls in the world (the "accept your fate so you will have a better future life" bullshit). Religions (ie organized faith) are inherently totalitarian ideologies, seeking to control all aspects of life, just like stalinism did. I don't care if people have some weird faith even if i think it is bullshit that some people believe in due to education or that they can't cope with the fact that life have no meaning, but organized faith, ie religion, will always try to push to force their belief on other people in one way or another.

 

[Nyvis]

Religion evolved from faith which is basically the various explanations humans found to things they didn't understood. Don't understand thunder ? Well some sky dude did it. And then you form a hierarchy which creates religious law, which creates oppression. That is the reason most communists don't like religion : it is because it is a tool of social control. Abrahamic religions created a whole set of laws that oppressed a part of the population (non believers, women, etc) that is a core set of their belief. Others like the Dharmic religions are some of the most efficient tools of social controls in the world (the "accept your fate so you will have a better future life" bullshit). Religions (ie organized faith) are inherently totalitarian ideologies, seeking to control all aspects of life, just like stalinism did. I don't care if people have some weird faith even if i think it is bullshit that some people believe in due to education or that they can't cope with the fact that life have no meaning, but organized faith, ie religion, will always try to push to force their belief on other people in one way or another.

Maaaaybe not the best way to address someone's fear of persecution?

I broadly agree organized religion has been shitty through history and would have been in the build up to the revolution too. But I don't think doubling down is reassuring.

 

[ANARCHY_4_ALL]

First off, Richard you're making a huge assumption with no evidence and all evidence being to contrary. Aelita and several others have made it very clear that faith and congregations of various religions still exist in the UASR. Organized religion as we know it has been dismantled from the inside. Hierarchy structures have been eliminated, true separation of church and state has been implemented, religious bigotry outlawed(bigotry towards the religious as well), and integration of various differing religions has developed. The UASR citizens are an amalgamation of Trinitarians, atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, pagans, Wiccans, Native American folklore, Buddhists, African folklore, and etc. believers. IMHO I'm sure that there is a large number of atheists and agnostics ITTL who idolize a historical interpretation of Yeshua of Nazarene as one of the grandest social revolutionaries in history. Richard it seems that you believe that the absence of an organized hierarchial exclusive denomination religious institution is the same as their being no faith based congregation of religious followers.

 

[Richard Osborne]

First off, Richard you're making a huge assumption with no evidence and all evidence being to contrary. Aelita and several others have made it very clear that faith and congregations of various religions still exist in the UASR. Organized religion as we know it has been dismantled from the inside. Hierarchy structures have been eliminated, true separation of church and state has been implemented, religious bigotry outlawed(bigotry towards the religious as well), and integration of various differing religions has developed. The UASR citizens are an amalgamation of Trinitarians, atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, pagans, Wiccans, Native American folklore, Buddhists, African folklore, and etc. believers. IMHO I'm sure that there is a large number of atheists and agnostics ITTL who idolize a historical interpretation of Yeshua of Nazarene as one of the grandest social revolutionaries in history. Richard it seems that you believe that the absence of an organized hierarchial exclusive denomination religious institution is the same as their being no faith based congregation of religious followers.

No? I think what I said was poorly worded so I'll explain.Aelita said in Sufficient Velocity that the majority of the USAR is atheist or agnostic and religious people are viewed like people who believe in ouji boards. I also am a member a no hierarchy church so don't be so quick to judge. Again I partially caused this from bad wording so no salt has been spilled.

 

[Richard Osborne]

How is that dystopic ? The Orthodox church is historically one of the most oppresive organisation church in christianity, especially for it's size. It dying would be a positive good.



Bullshit. Religion is but a small part of these cultures. Korean folk religion is basically dead (16% practitionner in South Korea) due to proselytism of the christian churches and the Kim regime, and no one think that there is no Korean culture. Chinese culture is not dying at all (despite pretty harsh measures on religion) and neither is the Japanese one when most of them are irreligious (because for them shintoism isn't a religion as it isn't organized).



Religion evolved from faith which is basically the various explanations humans found to things they didn't understood. Don't understand thunder ? Well some sky dude did it. And then you form a hierarchy which creates religious law, which creates oppression. That is the reason most communists don't like religion : it is because it is a tool of social control. Abrahamic religions created a whole set of laws that oppressed a part of the population (non believers, women, etc) that is a core set of their belief. Others like the Dharmic religions are some of the most efficient tools of social controls in the world (the "accept your fate so you will have a better future life" bullshit). Religions (ie organized faith) are inherently totalitarian ideologies, seeking to control all aspects of life, just like stalinism did. I don't care if people have some weird faith even if i think it is bullshit that some people believe in due to education or that they can't cope with the fact that life have no meaning, but organized faith, ie religion, will always try to push to force their belief on other people in one way or another.

You would be reaffirming my fears of the stab-in-the-back that every communist regime has done. But Luckily I have come to know there are far more tolerant and open-minded communist than religious bigots like you.

 

[WotanArgead]

Religion evolved from faith which is basically the various explanations humans found to things they didn't understood. Don't understand thunder ? Well some sky dude did it. And then you form a hierarchy which creates religious law, which creates oppression. That is the reason most communists don't like religion : it is because it is a tool of social control. Abrahamic religions created a whole set of laws that oppressed a part of the population (non believers, women, etc) that is a core set of their belief. Others like the Dharmic religions are some of the most efficient tools of social controls in the world (the "accept your fate so you will have a better future life" bullshit). Religions (ie organized faith) are inherently totalitarian ideologies, seeking to control all aspects of life, just like stalinism did. I don't care if people have some weird faith even if i think it is bullshit that some people believe in due to education or that they can't cope with the fact that life have no meaning, but organized faith, ie religion, will always try to push to force their belief on other people in one way or another.

I would rather say that the birth of religion is the search for patterns in everything. Experiments have shown the emergence and development of superstitious behavior. There are pigeons seated in cages. They click on the digging, and the machine gives out food. But later the device was set up so that the food would appear randomly. Blue is waiting for the food to arrive, and looks over the left shoulder - at the very same moment the food arrives. The result is that the pigeon is looking over the left shoulder.

 

[ANARCHY_4_ALL]

Thank you for clarifying. I believe I remember reading a similar post on here years ago. So, I can't be for sure and only Aelita can give a precise answer. But IMHO, most people in the UASR are going to be atheist, agnostic, or somewhere in between. To that majority an openly religious person will seem out of touch with reality but not necessarily ostracized or out right intolerance towards them. As you stated in the comparison of someone who believes in a oujia board IOTL. Those people aren't hated or persecuted for that so neither would someone for being religious ITTL, even more so actually because of the socially progressive attitude of the UASR.

 

[Miss Teri]

My guess as to the irreligiousness of the UASR is largely wide scale teachings of Marx.

 

[xsampa]

To change the topic, how does the FBU deal with white settlers in its dominions like Algeria or Kenya?

 

[Imladrik]

You would be reaffirming my fears of the stab-in-the-back that every communist regime has done. But Luckily I have come to know there are far more tolerant and open-minded communist than religious bigots like you.

Religious organisation have a 99% track record of opposing communism violently and historicaly sided with the powerful to put down attempt to give power back to the people. Religions have opposed personnal freedom for centuries (and still is, see the opposition of the majority of christian churches to adoption or gay rights, see how many people oppress people from another religion in the name of their own). It took more than a century for the catholic church to accept that France would be a republic. Catholics still don't follow the same rules as other churches in France because they disagree with them. These are the reasons why hard secularism is needed.

Where did i say anything bigoted ? As i said i don't give a fuck if someone believe in something i find stupid (flat earther for example) but not dangerous (unlike dangerous practice like the no vaccination practice of the Jehovah's witness which is dangerous for other people, ie those who can't be vaccinated and rely on herd immunity to be safe), which is basically what most personnal faith are. What i dislike are organized faith, what we call religion, as most of the time the reason to exist is a mean of social control, just like feudalism was, or "liberal democracy" is.

Maaaaybe not the best way to address someone's fear of persecution?

I broadly agree organized religion has been shitty through history and would have been in the build up to the revolution too. But I don't think doubling down is reassuring.

We should be the one fearing persecution, religious groups butchered communist (or even, the irony, proto religious socialists) many times in history : Luther sided with the nobility to crush the peasants and Müntzer and one of the difference betwee nthe too reformers was about organisation, Mazdak was apprently "excommunicated" due to criticizing the clergy, the catholic church supporting every right wing junta in the world during the cold war at the expense of their own members following liberation theology, Indonesian islamic groups allying with the nationalists and the army to massacre half a million communists, the "unholy" alliance against the Rojava, etc.

 

[Richard Osborne]

Religious organisation have a 99% track record of opposing communism violently and historicaly sided with the powerful to put down attempt to give power back to the people. Religions have opposed personnal freedom for centuries (and still is, see the opposition of the majority of christian churches to adoption or gay rights, see how many people oppress people from another religion in the name of their own). It took more than a century for the catholic church to accept that France would be a republic. Catholics still don't follow the same rules as other churches in France because they disagree with them. These are the reasons why hard secularism is needed.

Where did i say anything bigoted ? As i said i don't give a fuck if someone believe in something i find stupid (flat earther for example) but not dangerous (unlike dangerous practice like the no vaccination practice of the Jehovah's witness which is dangerous for other people, ie those who can't be vaccinated and rely on herd immunity to be safe), which is basically what most personnal faith are. What i dislike are organized faith, what we call religion, as most of the time the reason to exist is a mean of social control, just like feudalism was, or "liberal democracy" is.



We should be the one fearing persecution, religious groups butchered communist (or even, the irony, proto religious socialists) many times in history : Luther sided with the nobility to crush the peasants and Müntzer and one of the difference betwee nthe too reformers was about organisation, Mazdak was apprently "excommunicated" due to criticizing the clergy, the catholic church supporting every right wing junta in the world during the cold war at the expense of their own members following liberation theology, Indonesian islamic groups allying with the nationalists and the army to massacre half a million communists, the "unholy" alliance against the Rojava, etc.

Literally every communist government has persecuted religion. China actively has muslims in torture camps. So how about you rightly go fuck yourself for questioning religious peoples ability to be leftist and justifying state persecution of the faithful? Yeah I know I'm gonna get in trouble for saying that but it needed saying. I'm done with this discussion. I've derailed this thread long enough. I have nothing against Atheist many friends are atheist, I am only against bigots of all creeds be they Christian or atheist or pastafarian.

 

[traveller76]

To change the topic, how does the FBU deal with white settlers in its dominions like Algeria or Kenya?

Here are my thoughts. From the 30s to 40s the whites are still in the dominant position economically and politically and with the American Civil War and the Second World War the French/British and others are more concerned about survival than things like civil rights. Pre-war there may be some more investment to make up for the loss of the North and Latin American markets but that is in the infancy stages.

Post-war to the 70s we see the FBU sponsoring immigration from Europe to the colonies to 'secure' them from communist movements and encourage more development. French, British, Italian, German, anyone who passes as 'white' and passes a security check gets to immigrate. We see big capital projects such as hydro-electric dams, railroad and port expansion and the beginnings of a middle class in many places. However, away from the glossy pictures many cities are surrounded by slums of people displaced as land is bought up and people are evicted. Many of these countries will have large police and military forces fighting 'bandits' that have received weapons and training from the Comintern. There are groups that work with the colonial governments ranging from missionaries to organized crime to covert independence activists. Many natives may travel to Europe and the Middle East as guest workers.

70s-90s sees the cost of security and economic power transitioning to local elites and groups (think South Africa IOTL). There are power sharing agreements but many countries have problems with corruption, pollution and economic inequality. Some states have risen to middle rank and now are middle grounds between the blocs. Some guest workers and their families have returned to the homeland while others have stayed.

 

[Manatee]

I find it a bit weird that Sweden joined the axis, and went full nazi, I mean sure we did some really messed up things with eugenics and such and our treatment of the mentally handicapped where horrible, but the Nazism never really where that much of a major power in swedish politics I mean for gods sake the highest number of votes for them ever where 27000 whilst the Swedish democratic socialist party where super powerful and where in power from 1932 to 1976. I would find more likely that Sweden would go full communists then nazi.