for anti-capitalist nontheists: if religion were the only way towards a..

[© tweed]

for anti-capitalist nontheists: if religion were the only way towards a 21st century socialism, would it be worth it?

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

Third choice (anti-capitalist theist).

[DC Al Fine]

Interesting question. I'll be following.

[Sic Semper Fascistis]

If I thought religion had an overall positive influence on society, I would obviously embrace it.

[fezzyfestoon]

If I thought religion had an overall positive influence on society, I would obviously embrace it.

That's what it boils down to for me as well. I couldn't care less about religion and don't expect it to ever be absent from my life, so I don't really have a choice but to either oppose it or embrace it. If it leads to a better world, I'd have no problem with embracing it.

[LastVoter]

Yes (anti-capitalist nontheist). Obviously it would have to look nothing like actual religion observed today.

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

Yes (anti-capitalist nontheist). Obviously it would have to look nothing like actual religion observed today.

That depends entirely on the religion in question.

[DemPGH]

No way. Let's assume I'm more socialist than what I am - I favor regulations, a better social safety net, and a more progressive tax system. I don't know if that qualifies as socialism, so let's say somewhat.

If religion were the way to an egalitarian American system (let's put it that way), I would not embrace it and would stay with the status quo because 1) I see the status quo as the lesser of two evils, 2) if there is one lesson that I could reduce history to it's that religion and government never mix. It always becomes about religious laws and some type of sinister crusading. Also, 3) out of intellectual honesty I could not embrace it, because I truly do not believe in religion.

[Redalgo]

Yes, and I already have a positive overall opinion of the religious Left. There may well still be several points of disagreement betwixt them and I related to public policy, social mores, and matters pertaining to the supernatural. Nonetheless, I am willing to collaborate with diverse groups of people with views divergent from mine to advance the common interest.

[angus]

Why not?

If I were into state control of the means of production and distribution of goods and services, I'd definitely co-opt at least some of the useful parts of various religions and philosophies in order to accomplish it.  It's a tall order, so you have to keep an open mind about these things.  

The best, maybe only, example of a true socialist imperialist state was the Tahuantansuyu.  Pachacuti, the Inca who reorganized the kindom of Cuzco, reorganized the religion as well as he conquered the region.  They were smart about it, when they took over a new city or tribe, they absorbed the local religion into their own, making their cultural norms more palatable to the locals.  In that way they went from a little city-state to a big empire in just under a century.  Hunger was unknown.  In times of famine or draught, grain was moved quickly and efficiently from regions of plenty to the impoverished regions.  Of course, state control of goods and services necessitates swift justice.  The penalties for crime were harsh.  For example, the penalty for adultery was death by boulder-drop.  Flawless system, both socialist and imperialist, and one which very smartly co-opted not only an existing religion, but which also absorbed new religions into its pantheon as it expanded without bound.

Till Pizarro showed up, anyway.

[Niemeyerite]

Undecided. Voted NO.

[Redalgo]

Why not?

If I were into state control of the means of production and distribution of goods and services, I'd definitely co-opt at least some of the useful parts of various religions and philosophies in order to accomplish it.  It's a tall order, so you have to keep an open mind about these things.

For me at least it is finding and working beside service-oriented people who want to empower others, give back to their communities, care about the well-being of all, and are determined to help leave the world a better place by the time they pass on. The point is most certainly not to give the state enormous amounts of power to control the economy or co-opt religious factions as a means to manipulate the general public.

Within one of the two chapters of Kiwanis here in Kalispell for instance, there are opportunities for me to work with many religious, conservative folk to feed needy families, send funding overseas to combat horrific diseases in LDCs, get local students scholarships so they can attend college, collaborate with other non-profit organizations, and so forth. If any one of over a hundred churches in the community expressed an interest in working with us to pursue humanitarian goals, I'd be just as enthusiastic about lending a hand as anybody else in the crew.

Even though the aforementioned organization here in my corner of Montana does not get involved in politics, its core values are compatible with efforts to establish a socialist society: "give primacy to the human and spiritual rather than to the material values of life," "encourage the daily living of the Golden Rule in all human relationships," "promote the adoption and the application of higher social, business and professional standards," "develop, by precept and example, a more intelligent, aggressive and serviceable citizenship," "provide, through Kiwanis clubs, a practical means to form enduring friendships, to render altruistic service and to build better communities," "cooperate in creating and maintaining that sound public opinion and high idealism which make possible the increase of righteousness, justice, patriotism and goodwill."

Likewise, when there are opportunities for me to ally with people of similar political views I refuse to discriminate against them because their ideals happen to be inspired by Christ, Muhammad, or some other religious source. If religiously motivated folk can help build a better tomorrow, I have interest in joining them in that righteous endeavor and holding them in high esteem.
 

[Old Man Svensson]

Option #3 (anti-capitalist Pagan who is also anti-socialist for reasons)

[pbrower2a]

There had better be some choice of religion. Militant atheism combined with socialism has some ugly connotations.



(Racism is usually a reactionary phenomenon, and the Whites of the Russian Civil War were similarly ruthless).

[Torie]

Money trumps God around here. Who knew? 

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

Money trumps God around here. Who knew? 

It's more that money (or things which attend to money or to which money attends, anyway) trumps lack of God, it seems. Whether that's better or worse is up to interpretation.

[LastVoter]

Money trumps God around here. Who knew?  

When you are using religion to build an anti-capitalist society, is it "opiate of the masses"?

[angus]

The point is most certainly not to give the state enormous amounts of power to control the economy or co-opt religious factions as a means to manipulate the general public. 

Then I suppose you should vote no.  That is, if you're an anti-capital nontheist.

I didn't vote, actually, because I'm not really well-described as an anti-capital nontheist.  In the abstract, however, it seems to me to be a reasonable idea to co-opt religion as a means of spreading one's ideology, whatever that ideology might be.  Christianity, for example, can be used to foster socialism, foster capitalism, kill off muslims, or take so much gold out of Peru that it causes Spain to experience a deflationary collapse from which it would never recover. 

Powerful stuff, religion is.  I'd urge the anti-capital nontheists not to overlook it as a method of spreading their own gospel. 

[LastVoter]

The point is most certainly not to give the state enormous amounts of power to control the economy or co-opt religious factions as a means to manipulate the general public. 

Then I suppose you should vote no.  That is, if you're an anti-capital nontheist.

I didn't vote, actually, because I'm not really well-described as an anti-capital nontheist.  In the abstract, however, it seems to me to be a reasonable idea to co-opt religion as a means of spreading one's ideology, whatever that ideology might be.  Christianity, for example, can be used to foster socialism, foster capitalism, kill off muslims, or take so much gold out of Peru that it causes Spain to experience a deflationary collapse from which it would never recover. 

Powerful stuff, religion is.  I'd urge the anti-capital nontheists not to overlook it as a method of spreading their own gospel. 

I think previous attempts to spread ideology through religion were not very successful.

[DemPGH]

Well, there's a little dilemma here. Are we talking about a left wing theocracy, then, or are we talking about what Angus is talking about: just using religion to disseminate egalitarian, socialist ideas? If the former is the case, most certainly not. If the latter is the case, I really don't care what they do, but it actually might be a good idea for religious groups to try, although I would not embrace it. I think the "prosperity gospel" business is the most significant perversion of Christianity in modern times, certainly ideological. Countering that would be great, but again, it's for religious people to do.

[DC Al Fine]

Well, there's a little dilemma here. Are we talking about a left wing theocracy, then, or are we talking about what Angus is talking about: just using religion to disseminate egalitarian, socialist ideas? If the former is the case, most certainly not. If the latter is the case, I really don't care what they do, but it actually might be a good idea for religious groups to try, although I would not embrace it. I think the "prosperity gospel" business is the most significant perversion of Christianity in modern times, certainly ideological. Countering that would be great, but again, it's for religious people to do.

Amen

[angus]

I think previous attempts to spread ideology through religion were not very successful.

...just as previous attempts to oppress man's innate tendency to capitalism were unsuccessful.  Still, dreamers can dream. 

I think what you have to do is get people to buy into the anti-capitalist notion.  Some religions would be helpful in doing that.  Both Christianity and Buddhism, for example, talk about greed and materialism as anathematic to righteousness.  They just haven't been properly exploited.  I'm not saying that spreading the political gospel is an easy task, especially during times of peace and prosperity, but a true radical must be prepared to use whatever weapons are at his disposal.  It seems short-sighted to overlook religion as a useful tool.  Of course, inventing a new one would be better than using any of the existing ones, as they all have interpretations which don't necessarily lend themselves to the cause.

[Dr. Cynic]

If it led to a fairer society, then I wouldn't really care how it was accomplished, but I would not tolerate any sort of social oppression in exchange for some sort of socialist purity. I don't consider myself a socialist anyway, I consider myself a social democrat.

[LastVoter]

I think previous attempts to spread ideology through religion were not very successful.

...just as previous attempts to oppress man's innate tendency to capitalism were unsuccessful.  Still, dreamers can dream. 

I think what you have to do is get people to buy into the anti-capitalist notion.  Some religions would be helpful in doing that.  Both Christianity and Buddhism, for example, talk about greed and materialism as anathematic to righteousness.  They just haven't been properly exploited.  I'm not saying that spreading the political gospel is an easy task, especially during times of peace and prosperity, but a true radical must be prepared to use whatever weapons are at his disposal.  It seems short-sighted to overlook religion as a useful tool.  Of course, inventing a new one would be better than using any of the existing ones, as they all have interpretations which don't necessarily lend themselves to the cause.

You've got to be joking. Capitalism and market are inventions that arised from complex societies, certainly not innate.

[Blue3]

I'm not an anti-capitalist nontheist... but is this thread asking if religion was the only way, or if theocracy was the only way?

If it's people voluntarily choosing socialism as a result of their religious beliefs, in a separation of church and state society, then why would anyone who supports socialism say no to that?