Dialectical materialism: our ideas are our social material conditions reflected imperfectly in our brain

Religious folks implementing the above: god set the above matter in motion

A sensible communist would understand that religions themselves reflect the political economy (eg UAE salafist islam with their concentrations of captial and imperialist comprador class is significantly different to the Islam of Hamas and their revolutionary anti-imperialism despite both being Sunni. One could make a similar argument for say the Catholicism of cuba vs catholicism found in USA), and athiesm does not make you an anti-imperialist let alone having a scientific understanding of capital.

And to hit it really on its head: consider all these Western Marxists refusing to support those on the ground fighting imperialists; they are essentially liberals cosplaying with a sickle and a hammer.

Marxism is a science, and this includes the science of how capital works and how to build socialism from it (“from” in a dialectical materialist sense). If a person practising a religion can also be a scientist then the same coul be said for a social scientist.

Develop the vanguard that will help the peoples you want to emancipate scientifically, everyone else is just wasting your time.

(My background: I am an athiest but my ancestor’s homeland would not have ended formal western colonisation without revolutionary socialist muslims. Period.)

I don’t think any government type is compatible with religions.

You’re reacting to the anti-religious antics of people who don’t have enough of an identity that they need performative atheism to feel superior to others. That’s not communism, and it’s certainly not limited to communism. Lots of capitalists behave the same way.

Yes, Marxism is a materialist philosophy. It does not allow for things like morality and the supernatural to be used for explanatory purposes. That doesn’t mean you can’t believe in those things and it doesn’t mean you can’t practice organized religion. What it means is that you can’t use the contents of your religious beliefs as the basis for supporting an argument.

This should be pretty obvious for any plural society though. You can’t say that the reason we should have Law 4815-D is because it’s God’s will. You can’t say that the reason we should execute this prisoner is because of crimes against God. That will only work in a society where everyone believes mostly the exact same things. As soon as two or three religions coexist in a society, they’re going to disagree on what God’s Will is or what constitutes a crime against God. How do you build a pluralistic society in this case?

So go ahead and be religious and also be a communist. But understand that communism is a scientific analysis of the way society actually functions. It doesn’t care why a specific prophet said a specific thing at a specific time (though it may have an opinion). It cares about what we need to do to build a sustainable society of liberated people. It’s like any science. How can you be a rocket scientist and be religious? How can you be a cancer researcher and be religious? How can you study chemical catalysts and be religious? You simply don’t use your religion as the analytical tool for that domain. You don’t say the rocket launch failed because it was God’s Will - you study the data and run experiments. The same is true of communism.

Once you come to terns with that, let the performative atheists know that they’re harming the revolution.

I suggest you learn about waqf and compare it with communism. It will surprise you. And I heard Umar II did something amazing.

I have faced hostility from leftists that are atheist and hostile towards religion and been called a revisionist. If this is how me and others are gonna be treated just because of our faith, I’d rather die than simply be used as cannon fodder in a revolution.

Just ignore them, my Islamic communist friend. They are still beginners.

I am sorry if my english is bad and I am a radical centrist.

You have to remember that the extremely militant atheism of the Russian and Spanish revolutions were in response to the clergy aligning themselves with the ruling class and reactionary forces. This is because the class interests of the clergy, as property owners, was aligned with that of the aristocrats and bourgeoisie and was inherently at odds with socialism. I do think certain parts of the revolutionary movements overcorrected in reaction but it’s understandable why they zero’d in on religion so strongly with this context.

I’m not a big intellectual guy, so I don’t really have a ton to add to the discussion. BUT! I do know that a lot of South American Catholic Socialists have ton a ton of work on trying to square that circle between Socialism and religion through Liberation Theology.

I don’t know of any great resources to read about it. Maybe Cowbee has something in his back pocket on the topic? He’s the smartest guy I know about Communism stuff.

Religious people believe in stuff like divine intervention or divine will. A communist would probably look at islam (my faith) and be like “No prophet was sent a message by God and acted upon it, it was their material conditions that made them act.” I don’t see how one could believe both, it feels like its either or.

You might be dealing with people who are mixing up mechanical materialism (see: https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Mechanical_materialism) with dialectical materialism.

I’m pretty sure a dialectical materialist view would say that somebody receiving a message from a god is part of their material conditions (if they did indeed receive such a message). From the other end of the belief, that they imagined the message somehow / that it was made up in some way, it might be more accurate to say the superstructure (beliefs level of things) is more of a driving factor in that, but either way, it’s still a real thing impacting them.

We could put it in a context that’s less charged with theological debate and belief for comparison: Suppose the president of the US were to text me directly and tell me that if I don’t do X, they are going to do Y threatening thing to me. Is it likely the actual president texted me? No. But that doesn’t make it totally impossible. Either way, if I believe that he did and if I believe that if I don’t do X in response to his message, then Y is going to happen (that I perceive as bad), then I’m going to be pretty motivated to do X if Y is bad enough. Now maybe I ignore the text and Y never happens, and I assume I was scammed. Or maybe I ignore it and Y does happen, and now I’m terrified. With the first outcome, I probably don’t change my behavior as a result. With the second, I probably do.

I don’t know if I’m making the point clear, but basically what I’m trying get at is that dialectical and historical materialism is a process of understanding the world as we know it, but I don’t think it is equipped to weigh in on whether deities exist (I’m open to correction if people believe otherwise). It can weigh in on religious systems, however, and what kind of impact it has when people believe in them and act upon that belief.

As to something like divine intervention, I don’t think it’s very practical (from a tactical point of view) for a communist to believe in it because you don’t want to be in a situation where you are literally at war, struggling to survive, and instead of working out what weapons and tactics will win, you sit aside and pray to be saved. However, you could probably believe in divine intervention insofar as pray helping you win, as long as you aren’t losing sight of tactics. And you might even be right in a sense, regardless of whether there is a deity who is willing to intervene on your behalf, in the sense that people believing in something beyond themselves and being collectively empowered as a result can be motivating and keep them strong in times of struggle.

Note that the point about prayer vs. action is even found in a well-known religious parable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_drowning_man

The parable of the drowning man, also known as Two Boats and a Helicopter, is a short story, often told as a joke, most often about a devoutly Christian man, frequently a minister, who refuses several rescue attempts in the face of approaching floodwaters, each time telling the rescuers that God will save him. He finally drowns in the flood and, standing before God, asks why he was not saved. God replies that He sent the rescuers that the man turned down.

I would say, at the end of the day, it’s less about religion itself and more about the form it takes. If the exploiting classes use X religion as part of their ruling power, you may have to forcibly change things about a particular religious institution in order to take power. If you are a believer in that particular religious institution, you might view it more as a theological fight over what is correct doctrine and practice. If you’re secular, you might view it more as deposing manipulative religious power. Either way, the nature and form of political power has to be taken seriously. No matter what you believe, if you want to take power seriously, you have to take seriously what institutions are tangled up in it.

I hope that makes sense.

Let me ask you something: being a sunni/shia affects you capacity of collaboration with shias/sunnis?

Scientific Socialism and Jewish Religious Thought in the Early Soviet Union

Easy peasy! Scientific socialism posits that capitalism creates the conditions for its own overthrow. Thus, every evil that the capitalists commit ultimately undermines them and leads toward liberation. No matter how hard he tries, man cannot subvert God’s will, and even in attempting to do so he cannot but fulfill it. If liberation is incipient within the logic of the machinery of oppression, does this not imply the existence of a just God?

The imperialists, in their drive for greater profits, ended up undermining the military power that allowed them to keep control over the world - once again, the internal logic of capitalism drove itself toward its own destruction. The defence contractors consolidated, and every new procurement program became a multi-billion dollar boondoggle. But it didn’t matter, they had won! The USSR was gone, and the world was theirs. The US military would only ever need to bully small countries, and the production rates of advanced weaponry would never be a hindrance to that. In their hubris, they didn’t understand the extent to which they had undermined themselves, and they tried to pull on Iran what they pulled in Venezuela.

Iran was not a soft target. It was the hardest target they could have picked outside of China or Russia, and it was on the forefront of the military technologies that are the great equalizer in the 21st century - drones and missiles, fired out of hardened underground bases. The Amero-Israeli shock and awe campaign achieved little besides creating martyrs, and the empire was exposed as a paper tiger. They expended precision standoff munitions at an unsustainable rate, cutting deeply into the stocks earmarked for a big showdown with China, and they lost irreplaceable radars and high-value aircraft.

This is the first anti-imperial war in the modern era. Previous wars were anti-colonial in character, aiming to kick the imperialists out of Vietnam, or Angola, or Algeria. Iran has checked US power across the entire middle east, and the possibility still exists that they will be driven out of the region entirely. Where was the spark that ignited this conflagration blazing across the world? None other than the birthplace of Jesus Christ, Palestine.

I don’t think you need to integrate Marxism so deeply into your ontology if you want to be an effective communist.

Personally I’m not religious but after diving deeply into some philosophical matters I’ve decided I can’t really call myself a materialist anymore, at least not in the deep ontological sense. This doesn’t mean I can’t accept that Marxism is the best tool we have for analyzing and, hopefully in the near future, shaping society to be more prosperous, more free, and more harmonious for all people no matter their beliefs.

The anti-religion militant-atheist vein of Marxists are conflating faith and religious institutions. Its bad analysis because the only religion they had experience with was a “state religion.” The Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church were state institutions. Priests were essentially cops. They were eventually replaced by social workers and psychologists in secular society.

Most religious institutions are reactionary and exist to uphold classism more than to uphold the spiritual teachings they espouse. Its very similar to how factories under capitalism are built to make money for their owners not to produce goods, but that does not mean the factory must be destroyed and no factory should survive the revolution.

The bourgeois perverted religions institutions must be seized by the faithful.

I have faced hostility from leftists that are atheist and hostile towards religion and been called a revisionist.

Fuck’em. What authority do those people have to tell you what your personal beliefs can be?

When you look at how the People’s Republic of China (or any other AES state) approaches matters of faith, they don’t dictate what people can and can’t believe as long as they’re not proselytizing or campaigning for temporal authority for their organised religion.

And the reason I give China as an example is because they’re the grown ups in the room when it comes to the leftist cause, while I’m willng to bet that the people castigating you for your faith are part of a left that’s constantly infighting and being ineffective.

There are millions of communist Muslims, surely. With almost two billion Muslims in the world, and 26 million in China alone, the statistics are in your favor. I am a communist Muslim and I know many where I live in a non-Muslim region. Beyond that, communists of other religions would be in the millions as well, especially Christians in LatAm. As others have pointed out, you just need to be able to 1) ignore anti-social people like the types of atheists you are describing. They are never going to be able to organize anything because of their anti-social behavior. Even if one is an atheist, most people are not and if you are mocking them they will be against you.

2. separate your personal relationship with Allah from your material analysis. If undertaking a material analysis, you can only rely on material data that is empirical.

3. understand that communism is what we were put here to achieve. An equitable world of peace and prosperity is the vision, and communism is the vehicle to get there. Our faith is what allows us to be dedicated to that mission instead of being constantly pulled off track by self gratification

im not religious in the traditional sense but i do believe in manifestation and dont think this is the only plane of existence (kind of feels weird to even admit it here, not very materialist i know).

i believe that as an individual you can escape your material conditions for sure. you yourself can attract better conditions for your life and ive done this many times.

however, thats an individual thing. the working class, the billions of us, still face exploitation and the effects of imperialism while the rich dont. you see many women in the manifestation community get better paying jobs and whatever else they want but in the 19th century how would that work when we didnt have as many rights? a woman at that time didnt manifest nicer things but liberation. she said to herself ”i will die for other women to live, i will die for other women to live” and thats what happened.

i tend to keep my personal beliefs vs my marxist beliefs very separate. i dont think theres anything wrong with being personally religious as long as you dont become a reactionary.

look at china for example. members of the CPC HAVE to be atheist but citizens are free to do what they want. religious leaders arent allowed to scam the populace.

and as for hostility from other communists. like i mentioned, i think its important to keep your personal spiritual beliefs private.

eastern europe didnt magically become christian again after decades of state atheism, people stayed christian in private and there was nothing wrong with that.

also, Islam and communism are not a strange combination these days because the united states causes endless wars in this region. i dont blame hamas or the houthis, but it is good to adopt a marxist leninist ideology over a nationalist ideology in the long run.

if youre interested, look at the KMT vs CPC. while both were resistance against imperialism at some point but the KMT now engages with it by alliance with the US and Israel