|
So, preface this by saying I'm an American who could probably use a lot more real life experience with people who identify as Leftists. As of right now I mainly read articles, post on here, watch YT videos and that kind of thing. As such that's where I'm directing this question and maybe it's not at all as common as I am thinking. Is there some sort of antagonism between "Leftists" and religion? The Old Left or whatever was largely Marxist and Marx has that famous quote about religion that I think is kind of misquoted but the point is that religion is not viewed very favorably in that school of thought. In fact Atheism is encouraged. I watch many feminists who are justifiably hostile to religion and yet there is the whole Goddess Movement of the 60s and Wicca today and there were plenty of powerful women in religion throughout history. Not to deny the institutionalized sexism of religions like Christianity or Islam because that's undeniable but as with some other things, religions are becoming more inclusive and "liberal" with the flow of time. Then there's the fact of the Religious Right here in the US. Perhaps my feeling that there is a lopsided misrepresentation of religious and politically active people on the Left is due to the fact the people you hear crying their religion the loudest tend to be Right Wing Evangelical nutjobs. But I was wondering if the atheism on the Left was also a response to this? All these super religious people have these awful views and you see them more than any other religious person it feels like so people tend to associate awful politics with religion. I'm not religious in the sense I follow a religion. I simply think they are fascinating from a historical perspective and in terms of the modern day, they aren't going anywhere any time soon and so I don't think it's really wise to be hostile to them. But maybe I have a fundamental misunderstanding and that's what I'm looking to find out from people here. Is there no divide between liberals and religion? Is it all in my mind or am I just wrong because I've spent too much time on this forum?
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 10:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 08:44 |
|
|
Marx obviously wasn't a big fan of religion. But there's a rich tradition of Christian socialism. The British Labour Party has been hugely influenced by it over its entire history, with many of its founding fathers being from a nonconformist background. There is plenty anti-clericism on the left but you also have liberation theology, Tony Benn, Dorothy Day, and plenty other examples.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
It kinda depends who you talk to, but I'd say most people on the left (as in, further left than the American Democrats) trend more toward atheism and agnosticism. A lot of the anti sentiment comes from religion being used as a tool to oppress people. You could certainly make a very strong case of Jesus as written being a socialist. IMO believe as you please, you absolutely have the right, until you start trying to impose it on other people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 10:48
|
|
|
The left, i.e. Anarchists, socialists and communists (lots of overlap here), is against hierarchy and unjustified authority in general. Any system that seeks to control people through the oppression of hierarchy is opposed by most leftists except of the authoritarian type, such as Leninists, Stalinists, Tankies and Maoists. Religion is a hierarchical system of oppression and thus is generally opposed by those of us on the left who are not authoritarians. We also accept people who are religious but that do not want to force their system upon us, as a pragmatic compromise since most of the world is still fairly religious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 10:49
|
|
|
Also that quote from Marx about religion being the opiate of the masses was about how capitalism forces the masses into the hands of religion for mitigation of capitalism's excesses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 10:50
|
|
|
no it isn't
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
I think the problem most 'leftists" have with religion is when it's pushed on people in public or used to inform government policy which could affect people who don't share the same basis for their morale beliefs. If it's kept to the confines of the temple and the house that's fine, but when it starts seeping into other peoples affairs it become problematic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 11:53
|
|
|
The left as I see it sitting in America, in general doesn't care what if any religion you practice as long as you don't pull the levers of political power to proselytize or enforce religious doctrine (ie: Dominionism) and it isn't hurting anyone (ie: Scientology).
Negative_Kittens fucked around with this message at 12:08 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Religion is a form of collectivist social organization whose philosophical foundations are in fundamental misalignment with the philosophical foundations of leftist collectivist thought. However, it is generally best to understand and accept the role religion plays in conjunction with the human condition and allow this pragmatism to play a role in how to guide state action and individual acceptance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
I'd say you have to draw the line over what they consider "religion" to be first as there is a difference between having no faith in organized faith and a general hatred of any form of belief. Having anyone on the left poo poo on say Westburo Baptist Cult is more of a sign of vanishing sympathy for bad examples of faith keep being brought up and constantly being let off the hook because we have to "tolerate" openly hostile belief groups lest we hurt all of them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 12:20
|
|
|
Speaking as a Hindu, not only do I hate other, real religions, I would like us all to die so we can be recycled.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 12:23
|
|
|
Only 10-15% of Americans identify as non-religious, so it's a little silly to think that leftism is correlated with hating religion. Conservatives even have a good chunk of the nonbelievers in the form of libertarians. MLK is probably the most famous American leftist political activist, and he was a preacher. He also preached socialism and economic equality, which made him an enemy of the state in his day. It's a modern retelling that everyone loved MLK because he preached tolerance and equality. The reality was he was seen as inflammatory and extreme, albeit not as much as Malcom X. Non-evangelical and Catholic churches have a long history of helping push progressive causes such as housing/feeding the needy, ending wars, protecting immigrants, etc. Mostly the things Jesus actually talked about more often and of being the utmost importance to Christian faith and being good with God. The right wing media has been attacking the Democrats and anyone even vaguely progressive as hating religion for decades now, so it's seeped into the narrative, but it's absolute bullshit. I'm personally an atheist but I'm not going to push away allies because I think supernatural things are all silly. Protecting LGBTQ people, minorities, immigrants, the environment, the poor, and stopping bombing and shooting people halfway across the world are of far more immediate importance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 12:39
|
|
|
It drat well should. See: the role of organised religion as the oppressor in all of pre-modern Europe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 12:40
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Some of it, hope that helps.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 12:41
|
|
|
RasperFat posted:I'm personally an atheist but I'm not going to push away allies because I think supernatural things are all silly. Protecting LGBTQ people, minorities, immigrants, the environment, the poor, and stopping bombing and shooting people halfway across the world are of far more immediate importance. I think this is generally the most constructive way to look at this as a 'leftist'. In New Zealand the political middle ground is to be non-religious, with our two most popular leaders in recent times both being either non-religious or openly atheist, even though they lead opposing parties. That said there are of course fundamental groups on the right, but also devout Māori churches which have supported the left for generations. In the end I think it's all about the context, the time and the place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 12:45
|
|
|
RasperFat posted:I'm personally an atheist but I'm not going to push away allies because I think supernatural things are all silly. Protecting LGBTQ people, minorities, immigrants, the environment, the poor, and stopping bombing and shooting people halfway across the world are of far more immediate importance. Hmmm yeah, but that's not really the issue here. The beliefs of individual people, you are right, are largely irrelevant. If someone chooses to believe in the existence of this or that God, or believe that this or that text was divinely inspired, or believe that this or that holyman is a manifestation of God's power, then that is a matter of little consequence. If all you have is a list of someone's theological or metaphysical beliefs, that's not likely to tell you very much about that person's political beliefs or their ethics more generally. Assholes are equally well represented in all religious (and non-religious) traditions. So individual theologies do not matter - and I'd even go so far as to say that institutional theologies don't matter so much, either - but what does matter is the invariably negative emergent effects that insitutional religion has on social progress. On all the issues you mentioned, institutional religions are at best of no great help, at worst an active obstacle to progress being made. This is not necessarily a consequence of theology or doctrine - the world's religions have a great many (often conflicting) things to say about all of those issues. The problem, though, is that all religions aspire to be totalising (applicable to all areas of an individual's life) and universalising (imposed upon all of society) and these, inevitably, have led religions always make good friends with the ruling powers and with an interest on preserving the status quo, both of which are obviously anathemas agasint progress. No matter how many good things a religious doctrine teaches, or how many nice things a religious practitioner says, religion is just simply the best tool there is for obscuring people to the need for earthly progress. Historically, the last bastion of every form of bigotry and oppression in every society you care to mention has always been found in the sanctuary of some house of worship. Exceptions can be given of course, such as the liberation theology that was mentioned earlier. All I need to ask is 1) what the attitude of institutional religions were to such movements and 2) what influence such movements have succeeding in having over mainline versions of the faith. The fact is that liberation theologies - or any other religious movements geared towards social progress - succeed in spite of religious rather than as a consequence of it. Ultimately, the Left should be indifferent to God, but it should definitely be hostile to religion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 13:44
|
|
|
"the left" isnt a monolith, but there is a strong tradition of irreligious criticism hth and yeah if you read marx's comments about religion and sense any hostility towards religion itself then lmao ur pretty dumb
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
RasperFat posted:Only 10-15% of Americans identify as non-religious, so it's a little silly to think that leftism is correlated with hating religion. Conservatives even have a good chunk of the nonbelievers in the form of libertarians. We aren't all American here, friendo. Hell, most of tye right in my country aren't religious either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
In the US at least, the left is more distrustful of religion due to it being cited over and over against as a tool for oppressing women/gays/trans/etc. while passing religious freedom laws.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
It's good when it motivates people to pursue a positive justice in the world, bad when it inhibits that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
Of course the Left is hostile to religion. It is, after all, the party that more closely resembles the embodiment of the teachings of Christ.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:I'm not religious in the sense I follow a religion. I simply think they are fascinating from a historical perspective and in terms of the modern day, they aren't going anywhere any time soon and so I don't think it's really wise to be hostile to them. They aren't going to cease to exist from this earth any time soon, but America is also pretty unique among first world countries with how religious it is. Like Japan is 57% atheist and france is 40% with most first world countries being in the 30s, america is like 9 or 10%. America is pretty unique for a first world country. It wouldn't ever literally cease to exist entirely but it's pretty easy to imagine a couple generations from now religion just not being a big thing in a lot of europe and asia. It's less possible to imagine that happening any time soon in the US.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
since it hasn't been posted in full, here's the marx quote:quote:Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. exactly what to make of this in terms of hostility depends on who you ask. marx and engels have some sympathy for religion, lenin hates it, marxists like bloch think communism and christianity are striving toward the same thing and are completely compatible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:They aren't going to cease to exist from this earth any time soon, but America is also pretty unique among first world countries with how religious it is. Like Japan is 57% atheist and france is 40% with most first world countries being in the 30s, america is like 9 or 10%. America is pretty unique for a first world country. Well, in the US as well, religion, whil having great visible impact, is most often used as a scam to bilk people out of their money, like with Trump and his alliegence to Prosperity Gosepl preachers. But overall, church attendance is declining in the US. botany posted:since it hasn't been posted in full, here's the marx quote: Are we assuming that everyone is following strict marxism? I think most, at least US, leftists do not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:But overall, church attendance is declining in the US. Sure, that is the overall trend in general, but the US is still 200%, 300% or even 500% higher on that than a lot of other first world countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_attendance Like "religion" is becoming more and more a specifically american thing among first world countries. It's not going to leave america for a long time after a lot of europe is down to rates of like 1 or 2 percent or whatever. (no country is likely to get to anything like real zero percent)
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:They aren't going to cease to exist from this earth any time soon, but America is also pretty unique among first world countries with how religious it is. Like Japan is 57% atheist and france is 40% with most first world countries being in the 30s, america is like 9 or 10%. America is pretty unique for a first world country.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
The right is far more hostile towards religion than the left, they just make an exception for one religion in particular. The American right for example is incredibly hostile towards anything other than Christianity. The left in general is much better at religious freedom than the right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Are we assuming that everyone is following strict marxism? I think most, at least US, leftists do not. no, but the "opiate of the people" bit came up so I thought I'd post the whole thing for context.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
jabby posted:The right is far more hostile towards religion than the left, they just make an exception for one religion in particular. The American right for example is incredibly hostile towards anything other than Christianity. The left in general is much better at religious freedom than the right. Agreed, and very true. But the Left also tends to support limits on religious freedom where it comes to Church/State seperation and such, but overall supports more tolerant religious freedom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Agreed, and very true. But the Left also tends to support limits on religious freedom where it comes to Church/State seperation and such, Can you expand a little on this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
It depends. 'left" is a lot of things. There are absolutely far leftists who are opposed to the idea of religion at all. gently caress you Atheists and such. There are also leftists who are not opposed to religion but are opposed to parts of specific religions, especially those that harm or hurt others. "Hostile to religion" can mean so many things. I don't think you'll find many leftists who, for example, support 'religious freedom' laws that allow people to discriminate under the guise of following their religion, but that isn't the same as opposing religion entirely. That said, it's also far to say that the role religion has played in a lot of things, especially in the current right, also means there are a whole lot of bitter leftists who in a vacuum might not oppose religion but are very willing to be angry and loathing of it because of the impact it has had.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:Can you expand a little on this? Moderate/Progressive leftists tend to support religious freedom so long as it: does not push for government endorsement, does not advocate harm/discrimination against LGBT/Children/women etc., and tend to support free expression. Yes, you have your hardcore athiest types, but they are very much the hard-Left minority. This versus the current trend among the US Right like the Prosperity Gospel and Evangelical types Trump has surrounding him that push for breaking Church/State barriers, public endorsement of a specific religion in schools and government (DeVos and Jerry Falwell), and want to specifically target other religions as non-grata (i.e. Trump's Immigration ban focusing on Muslims and the targetting of Muslims/Middle Eastern individuals in general without due cause) CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Mar 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
The dominant religion in any society must by necessity form part of the foundation for that society. So religious figures are respected and, conversely, only people of 'respectability' ever become major religious figures. Now that's all well and good, except for the fact that that 'respectability' is going to be defined by adherence to the dominant ideology. Which is going to include excusing the oppression and excesses of current social hierarchies, because that's the kind of society we currently live in. Ergo, religion and religious communities are, more often than not, going to be reactionary. That's basically the long and short of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Moderate/Progressive leftists tend to support religious freedom so long as it: does not push for government endorsement, does not advocate harm/discrimination against LGBT/Children/etc., and tend to support free expression. OK sure, but I don't see how that's limiting religious freedom
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:OK sure, but I don't see how that's limiting religious freedom I never said it was. However, there are those in the Right who argue that limits against bigotry and discrimination limit religious freedom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:OK sure, but I don't see how that's limiting religious freedom That is exactly the point. There is a huge push from the religious right in this country to make Christianity more than equal or appear oppressed by equality with other religions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
Religion is inherently reactionary. Even the "good" parts of religion are better handled by the government. Coercive religious charities are better than nothing but it's hugely inefficient at best and more often actively coercive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Coercive religious charities are better than nothing but it's hugely inefficient at best and more often actively coercive. Religious Charities (and charities in general) tend to only work during relatively mundane periods of downturn, that's why Social Welfare programs are all the more important: they function even during severe downturns.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
The left isn't inherently opposed to religion. However, in much of the world, the role religion has historically played in social and political structures tends to tie the local majority religion to the conservative power base in some way, as well as codifying various traditional practices, inequalities, and superstitions that the left might oppose. As a result, atheists and minority religions tend to align with the left (though it's by no means a guarantee).
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 08:44 |
|
|
Marx's "opiate of the people" thing is a bit ambiguous and I think is often taken out of context. Opiates aren't necessarily a bad thing, after all, like if you're in massive and debilitating pain they're probably the best thing for you. Religion and left wing politics absolutely are compatible, just look at liberation theology or the long tradition of church involvement in civil rights or in socialist movements in both the US and UK. In the old left christian socialists were pretty common, the wholesale realignment of American christians towards the right is actually a fairly recent phenomenon. Prior to Reagan a significant chunk of politically involved US christians were left of centre, though I suspect many of them were already drifting away from the left for awhile before that due to the socially liberal realignment taking place in the new left of the 60s and 70s with the drug use, promiscuity and whatnot that came with it. And on the whole the proto-brocialist new left as a project was pretty awful in terms of its unreconstructed sexual politics, its patronsing, idealising attitude to minorities and its unfocused attitude to collective political action so maybe the christian socialists it alienated had a point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 17:40
|
|
