I have seen these seemingly contradictory views particularly from Muslim comrades. However, this is not limited to them.
This post is a genuine question not a rant, so please treat it as such.
I have seen these seemingly contradictory views particularly from Muslim comrades. However, this is not limited to them.
This post is a genuine question not a rant, so please treat it as such.
That’s a great view of religion. I believe most anti-religious discussion stems from a lack of understanding of the different interpretations of religious text, instead solely concentrating on the literary meaning as well as the predominant interpretation as a representative of the religion as a whole. You answered my question as well as many others on religion in an excellent manner. I also live in a predominately Muslim nation, but here in Lebanon I sadly haven’t seen such growth in community. If you don’t mind me asking, where have you seen the growth? Also, since we’re talking about interpretation, we have evidence of evolution and the big bang severely contradicting the religious explanation. Do you always take it in the sense of interpretation there?
Glad it was of some use!
I should clarify that it doesn’t exist on a massive scale, but it’s still noticeable where I live despite lots of people still being bigots and homophobes ofc. Some neighborhoods around here with significant amounts of left-leaning young people here are quite accepting of LGBTQ+ ideas or at least open-minded, and the phenomenon of emerging LGBTQ+ acceptance barely is different from anywhere else in world (exposure to the ideas whether in person or online, gradual rejection of dogmatic thought, etc).
In typical Marxist fashion, we would say it’s in the superstructure of class society, i.e. how culture, religion, politics, social relations relate to and are shaped by the “base” (the mode of production, property relations, etc) and vice versa. I believe that one of only reasons that, for instance, Western society is able to sell a facade of progressiveness in regards to LGBTQ+ rights, is because it can be co-opted by capitalists, often monopolizing firms, and gain a new consumer base to expand profits through marketing itself with tokenism of these groups. This means an artificial imposition of these “LGBTQ+ rights” which don’t do away with the reason they are marginalized and discriminated against in the first place, as evident by many Westerners still being highly reactionary regarding the cause like anywhere else, only exception kind of being the so-called gen z and millenial generations (the age groups most disillusioned with late stage capitalism and the dogmatic thought that supports it, mind you).
What we need to do away with is the fundamental cause for all forms of bigotry in the first place, which results from private property and class relations to the mode of production - in our period of history, it’s capitalism that leverages bigotry to divide the proletariat and prevents them from uniting against the bourgeoisie, the ruling class, by scapegoating eachother. It’s a trick, because hatred towards any minority or marginalized group will not pay rent, will not preserve your savings, will not eliminate inflation, will not give you infrastructure, healthcare, education, sovereignty, etc. and will not improve your life in general. Basically, when we change the “base”, through a socialist mode of production and eventually communism, we erode the fundamental dynamics of society which pave the way for bigotry and division to begin with. Cuba’s recent progressive LGBTQ+ legistlation (family code) is brilliant example of this, gaining support among the majority of Cubans voting in the referendum. To simply claim that “religion inherently causes x”, or “culture inherently causes x”, and so on, is to use idealist analysis (or lack thereof) as opposed to dialectical and historical materialism.
I can’t really say tbh, since I’m not religious myself. I suppose it can vary greatly, and religion isn’t necessarily a dogma after all, otherwise we would not have syncretic Islamic sects, or for example Christian denominations which all differ greatly (many of which blend indigenous folk religions together with Abrahamic teachings, Alevism comes to mind). It’s so much more than just an answer to the great “why”, but an entire set of culture, traditions and moral codes tied to anthropology, but again it all depends on what religion means to an adherent I’d say.
I thought you were, so that’s why I asked you lol. Anyways, you’re 100% right. Workers blaming other workers that seem “different” as if there’s some kind of “normal” is hilariously ignorant until the working class starts attacking each other resulting in a kind of bourgeois illusion of “division” of conservative liberal and progressive liberal like in the US of crackers. In summary, it’s not something to be ignored.
Ahahah, can’t blame you. I guess I would call myself an “atheist”, even though I hate the fact that this term has been co-opted by pseudo-intellectual Reddit liberals and nihilistic hyper-individualists and bears a negative connotation for some lol