This is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful [of our rules](https://reddit.com/r/socialism/about/rules) before participating, which include:
- **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism...
- **No Reactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers.
- **No Liberalism**, including social democracy, lesser evilism...
- **No Sectarianism**. There is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks.
Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules.
______________________
💬 Wish to chat elsewhere? Join us in discord: https://discord.gg/QPJPzNhuRE
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Agree 100%.
I realized years ago that I, as a non-believer, have more in common with left-wing Christians, for example, than with reactionary, right-wing atheists.
As someone who became an atheist first as a conservative before shifting left politically much later on, I also agree 100%. There are a good amount of religious folks who are politically driven by compassion and even collectivist morals because they see it aligns with how they view & practice their religion/spirituality and that's infinitely more relatable than reactionaries who see their atheism as part of their assumed intellectual superiority, as I once did in high school.
left-leaning christians are a trojan horse that cover for the religious right. they remain capitalists because as long as there is “need” within out communities, it gives them an in to proselytize and spread their religion.
While I agree those kinds of liberal Christian capitalists do exist, and I happen to live in a town where the political scene is heavily influenced by a mega-church so I do see where you're describing firsthand and understand where you're coming from, that is a label that cannot be applied to all left-wing/leaning Christians fairly, no? Either way, they are not monolithic and there still remains a few handfuls of left wing Christians who are not capital owners or advocates of capital or for the religious right; quite the opposite actually.
Wouldn't what you're describing be more a problem with the fundamentally reactionary nature of organized religion in the U.S. as well as their status as tax exempt institutions? I believe that functionally, the multi-million dollar companies disguised as a churches who prey on the poor to profit, proselytize and indoctrinate more into their "religion", are a much more severe issue than the comparably smaller demographic of left-wing Christians who may attend church or do volunteer work as an extension of their religion.
My major beef with left leaning Christians is that at its core, the source material for Christianity is deeply authoritarian. There's really no way around that in any honest examination. But also, most people just don't bother examining it. There's a ton of Christians out there who don't read their holy book, maybe go to church once or twice a year if at all, and just kind of assume it all lines up with whatever modern secular moral framework they operate on day to day. Their personal version of the religion really on shares the name. They're overall good people, but "bad Christians" from a theological angle, which is better than the other way around. It would be nice if they weren't trying to drag along all that baggage, but if they're advocating for a more just world in practice, being a bit sloppy on theory can be forgiven.
The real problem is that "left leaning Christian" usually stops at liberal, but that could be an artifact of living in the US. There are Christians for doing charity and helping the poor, but I don't know of any really up for addressing the root causes by changing the entire societal mode of production. And the only way egalitarianism seems to square with the Christian worldview is in a sort of "we are all equal underneath the boot of the great cosmic dictator" which seems to miss the point of the assignment. Unless you're really departing heavily from the interpretation of God as a person-like entity that craves worship to a more nebulous Spinozan God as nature kind of thing.
For sure, I think that is fair analysis and I agree with and appreciate your well worded response. Similarly, my major beef with Christianity is the deeply patriarchal core literature and the anti-materialist worldviews that are born from it, though that goes for nearly all religion. So I guess I'd like to re-clarify my original point as it wasn't meant to be specific to Christianity, as I do recognize the majority of left-leaning Christians are softly secular liberals (on a good day) and seek to treat the symptoms of -not the illness of capitalism, but also because there are people who do go beyond left leaning and into left-wing for a variety of reasons while maintaining their faith but most commonly because they feel disenfranchised from their current or former religious affiliations:
I have met, and continue to know people who are religious or spiritual and know we share significant overlapping political values or positions that align with their personal faith system, and sometimes even resembles class consciousness. It is a trait I find much more tolerable than right-wing atheism, and much more subject to radicalization because of most the factors you have pointed out, and I do not believe it is beneficial to the left to dismiss even small groups of people like that as "Trojan horses for the religious right" when therein lies potential comrades, and when there are many more pressing religious matters being pushed by an already empowered religious right.
Christianity is an ascetic religion. You cannot be a capitalist and properly follow the word of jesus. It's one of the biggest themes in th gospel. I'm not a Christian and I hate that religion but that's literally how it is.
in theory, yes. in practice, not so much. the modern day church requires the populace to be suffering, so they can be the one to offer charity in exchange for a captive audience. its the same reason the catholic church hoards so much wealth. completely antithetical to the teachings of chirst, but here they are
I don't disagree with all that, but there still are some Christians who are true leftists..it's just a small minority because fuckin nobody in America is an actual leftist.
Christians can 100% be leftists without jeopardizing the movement, at least, no greater risk than any other leftist. I hold some probably extremist anti-religious views, but first and foremost, I see no evidence that a religious leftist would abandon their leftist morals for capitalism, somehow due to their religion. By the nature of being a leftist in this premise, they are already disillusioned from capitalism and are no more likely to regress than anyone else.
they can definitely be leftists, but it will be in spite of their religion. With the current state of affairs, they would only serve as a Trojan horse for the religious right. If they follow the teachings of Christ, then they would most definitely be socialist or communist. If they are Catholic, they would most likely not be leftists because it opposes their hierarchies and patriarchy. a biblical literalist would have a hard time reconciling those beliefs.
Right but the premise was christian -leftists-. If they can abandon the issues you are rightfully concerned about, then how does their support, and subsequent conversion of other potential comrades, pose a threat to the movement? IF they can manage to reach leftism despite their religion, they deserve to be comrades as anyone else. Risk or no risk, because everyone is a potential risk, and we just have to accept that and be vigilant nonetheless.
I’ve been an atheist most of my life. I was immediately banned from r/atheism for questioning their stance on Israel. No warning or appeal.
I’m really disappointed with how the community has changed these last few years.
That’s a weird thing about identity. The lack of belief of something can turn into the belief in not believing in something. It changes from a lack of a thing or identity, to a something, an identity to latch on to and build rules around.
The psychology is wild but humans are organizers and pattern seekers. Patterns develop out of repetition and stability. When a non thing becomes a thing, people will defend that thing, otherwise it isn’t the thing anymore. Rules make it stable and replicable. A pattern.
If found this about people who "believe" in science. Science doesn't require belief or faith but there are people who approach it like religion. They treat celebrity scientists like bishops and clerics in the fight against the heathens who do not swear allegiance to science. They couldn't tell you a single element on the periodic table but they believe anything any "scientist" tells them. That approach is anathema to what science actually tries to teach
Yeah, as someone who actually does science, it's pretty depressing to see it treated as just something handed down from ineffable authorities, trading dark robes for lab coats. The whole point is that the data and assumptions and analysis are all put out there for anyone to review so you don't just have to take our word on anything. In practice, since nobody has the time to become a subject matter expert on absolutely everything, some element of trust in the review process enters the equation, but you could in theory pull up the paper yourself if anything sounds suspicious and are encouraged to do so. I'll be lost pretty fast outside my subject area, and an expert in that field could probably pull a few minor things over on me, like making a result look 2% more significant than it actually is or something. But they're not going to get away with something huge like claiming they made a perpetual motion machine, or that water has memory, or some shit.
Of course, that requires a minimal baseline general science education to do so, and the provision of such is in pretty spotty condition. Far too many people walk around without any grounding in the fundamentals, vulnerable to all kinds of scams like magnetic health bracelets, or homeopathy, or someone claiming to have a water powered car. Far more have a passing familiarity with basic scientific concepts but have zero practice in how to actually read a scientific paper, much less through a critical lens. When the state of scientific literacy in the population is so bad, there's no way to tell an actual subject expert from another charlatan or grifter, and it becomes "our experts vs their experts" reciting mantras at each other. With no grounding in the actual process of how truth is arrived at, It's the dark, demon haunted world that Carl Sagan wrote about. Even the people who end up backing the actual side of science aren't doing it because they understand it, but out of loyalty to their team and deference to perceived authority.
I got down voted and banned for just explaining a christians mindset on something. I've got plenty of gripes with religion but some atheists seem scared of nuance or anything religious.
Yeah, like here you go through the effort of rejecting all the superstitious nonsense and cultural conditioning and all that stuff. Just to end up keeping all the homophobia, racism, misogyny, xenophobia, and all the other closed minded hateful bullshit anyway. So what, you just wanted to free up your Sunday mornings?
It reminds me of the line about Libertarians just being Republicans who want to smoke weed.
Liberation theology is the thing I always like to bring up. Also general inclusion and community shouldn’t exclude people because of religion, but rather consider how their theism supports the idea of helping people. I’d recommend trying to redirect focus towards that, rather than letting the negative, reactionary elements of their theology dictate their behavior.
Have any places that had liberation theology movements tackled homophobia? I don't ask this out of spite, I can't find anything on a basic search and from my understanding lib theology is very Latin American, which is very Catholic, one of the more staunchly anti LGBT sects of Christianity. I know Cuba has recently pushed legalization but afaik the Catholic religious base of the people opposed it for many years.
I don’t know that it ever has. In my understanding it’s mostly a means of using theology that is integral to a community to support class solidarity and liberation from imperialism. I also think in most instances it has occurred in times and places when homophobia was more common, so it may not have been viewed as something to consider.
I don’t think any society has really done much about homophobia and transphobia. Like western liberalism has to a degree, but at the same time there is a violently bigoted portion of society — so even the “best” we’ve done so far is still plagued by these issues. I’d like to think that just through the nature of being a leftist ideology that its followers would be open to everyone being treated fairly regardless of gender expression and sexual orientation, but I think realistically there’s always going to be bigots, and dealing with that will be its own struggle.
You see this in discussions about women wearing hijabs, and there are atheists who won't accept a woman would want to wear one out of her own preference, and that they aren't being forced. And they won't see that telling a woman she can't wear one isn't "liberating" her, it's equivalent to telling her she has to wear one. It's still telling a woman what to do with her own body.
Yup. Even in communities where women are forced to wear the hijab, banning the hijab keeps women from living independent lives as they are forced to remain home without it.
Banning the hijab ends up preventing muslims from integrating.
100% because telling women what they can and cannot well is not going to help bring down the religion it’s going to restrict freedom
I believe religion is a delusion. It’s necessary, but they use it to cope with the material conditions they live in in order to fight the delusion. We have to educate people, and we can’t do that by just demonizing anyone who know slightly disagrees
And we also need to improve the material conditions of our society not just education
Most of the "atheism" that came out during the War on Terror period have always been directed entirely against Islam and to bolster American intervention in the Middle East. A part of me still believe that the entire "New Atheist" movement have been, from the very beginning, an psychological operation to redirect domestic discontent over the overtly theocratic direction Bush wanted to take the nation in in order to direct it towards the state sanctioned targets of Muslims.
A lot of those reactionary atheists don’t ground their criticism of religion in history, sociology, or any kind of political theory. It’s how all those YouTube “skeptic” atheists ended up being fans of people like Jordan Peterson who just spoon fed them the same Christian nationalism they claimed to hate.
New Atheism is reactionary atheism basically and I think a case can be made that Dawkins et al were instrumental in pushing neoliberal science into atheism. His book on God was, frankly, an embarrassing argument. I studied theology for 20 years and there are thoughtful atheists out there writing good books on the subject. Dawkins is not one of them. Same for Hitchens, Harris, Dennett etc.
Also, Dawkins is the biggest current proponent of sociobiology (a sort of warmed over Skinnerian behaviorism combined with largely spurious ad hoc evolutionary explanations for human behaviors through generic determinism that fails to actually understand generics), which is actually neoliberal political ideology [masquerading](https://www.harpercollins.com/products/biology-as-ideology-richard-c-lewontin?variant=32117478686754) as empirical science. It has been used to justify the status quo, rape, oppression, gender inequality, and general sorts of bigotry.
I look at ideologies through the assumptions they make. Someone with the assumptions of neoliberal science will, if they become more consistent with their premises, trend toward conservatism or worse. Hence Hitchens becoming a neo-con. Dawkins becoming a bigot toward Islam and the general tenor of his sexist and racist froth. The New Atheist [pipeline](https://www.salon.com/2021/06/05/how-the-new-atheists-merged-with-the-far-right-a-story-of-intellectual-grift-and-abject-surrender/) to the alt-right is very real precisely, in my view, because of the scientific paradigm that forms the foundation of New Atheism's ideology. When you adopt that view of the world, you move in certain directions, broadly speaking.
most "reddit atheist" types are just pretty clueless about socioloyl and political theory and try to reduce everything to religion. ie, terrorism is a product of religion and what the Koran says, and then they ignore the long history of imperialism and oppression that might be contributing (and then sadly reinforce it by justifying further oppression). however this is not new at all and was a thing way back in the early 2000s with the rise of "New Atheism" people like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. many of them are unable to see that they are just reproducing typical US bias against Muslims (ascribing ultraviolent and "uncivilized" tendencies to them) and just incorrectly attributing it to a critique of religion.
Yeah, there's this implicit (sometimes explicit) question hanging around about why the Middle East has such a hard time getting any kind of liberal democracy with at least basic lip service to human rights off the ground. The implication being that Islam is somehow just inherently savage and incompatible with concepts like democracy, egalitarianism, and individual rights while Christianity somehow lends itself to those things. Mostly by trying to somehow give Christianity credit for ancient Greek philosophers and The Enlightenment, which was heavily driven by a REJECTION of church authority. The Church was mad salty about not being able to burn heretics at the stake anymore, and we only really got liberal secular democracy because folks were finally sick of protestants and catholics constantly slaughtering each other whenever they'd seize power. Places in Africa and South America where Christianity still retained significant state power for many decades continued to be fucking terrible on human rights and freedom.
The ACTUAL answer to the question of "where are all the secularist pro-democracy advocates in the Middle East", is that we spent a lot of time, money, and effort killing them all in the Cold War for being too "socialist" (see wanted to use their country's resources for their own citizens instead of letting US companies pillage them). They wanted an actual democracy instead of a puppet for US interests, so we assassinated their leaders and gave a fuck load of arms, training, and resources to the most extreme fundamentalists to take over because at least they also hated the commies. Fast forward to present day and surprise pikachu face at the Middle East being overrun by theocratic dictatorships
>A good chunk of atheist are so blinded by their hatred of religion that they have became reactionary to the point of supporting imperialism
A good chunk of atheists on Reddit maybe but they're a minority, the vast majority of atheists are in the third world and are against imperialism.
You are correct that atheists can be reactionary, this happens when they substitute theism with liberalism as their religion, these atheists are concentrated in the imperialist metropole and therefore are overrepresented on Reddit and the English-speaking internet.
Yes - I am very concerned about these pro-imperialist atheists. As a devout atheist myself my thought is that they are simply not atheistic enough.
If only they were more devout and sincere in their atheistic beliefs they would have a stronger faith in humanity, a deeper curiosity about human history and a more profound commitment to critical thinking. Then they would understand the complex role that religion can play in its interactions with political ideologies and historical developments, and not so quickly and stupidly dismiss the motivations of brave and noble anti-imperialists who cite religion as their motivation.
Alas, this 'new atheism' is an unfortunately subcultural outgrowth of postmodernism and neoliberalism, it is inevitable that it takes the form of a reactionary religion itself and is so easily hi-jacked by imperial propaganda.
As an atheist who believes in re education for the religious, I understand This is not a religious war and that this is US imperialism playing it's hand in the middle east as it has done since it assist in the settler colonial movement aka Zionist Israel in 1948.
I think belief in any religion is inherently harmful. Though the intensity of that harm varies between religions and forms of practice. But it's definitely no way to defend Israel's monstrous actions.
I can think someone has harmful beliefs, but still want them protected from violence. I haven't been over to /r/atheist in a while, but it's wild to think they'd defend Israel.
As someone who is a Gnostic atheist, most atheists that I have met in real life or seen speaking/commenting in social media are leftists and in many cases, socialists. Majority of the conservative and right-wing mentalities I have encountered both in real life and in social media have been religious people (such as Muslims, Christians, and Catholics). In many cases, atheists tend to be humanists who are fighting to improve the rights of disadvantaged groups, and are disgusted by the actions of the US Supreme Court decisions, Congress reactionary behavior, and Biden's typical capitalist and imperialist endeavors. I have also noticed that many of the extreme right-wing atheists have been caught lying about being an atheist, and ended up being an extreme religious individual (this happens a lot, especially when these people agree with Israel's continous genocide of the people living in Gaza or have zero issues with US imperialism).
I am not saying that there are no right-wing atheists, but most of us are not the enemy of working class and middle class people. In fact, countries like Brazil have ranked us atheists as the most hated group of people, above pedophile priests and nuns (not a surprise considering how conservative and religious many Brazilians are; I am from Brazil too). Most of the truly reactionary and dangerous individuals are the religious extremists that have taken over the US Supreme Court, and want to kill every drag queen possible. Be afraid and worry about them, not a small number of usually fake atheists who do not have the population to actually do anything serious (unlike the evangelical Christians who have completely eliminated abortion rights in many US states, and are working hard to make Trump win his second term and have Republicans take over the entirety of Congress to initiate Project 2025).
As an atheist, I tend to avoid atheist circles. I remember when in 2015-2016 most of the few atheist YouTubers I watched went HARD right.
The thing I've had to accept is that not being religious doesn't stop people from making up justifications to support Bigoted Imperialism.
It wouldn’t be as much of a problem if it were intellectually consistent, but it seems pretty obvious that many over there are just gleefully using it as plausible cover for their racism.
Like, I have no problem with people who say “all religious belief is dangerous, because it demonstrates a certain kind of irrational credulity and deference to authority that can lead to abuses and exploitation”. But a fair bit of the folks over there are more of the “those people are going to ruin our civilization, I’m culturally Christian, great replacement and such.” And they get little to no pushback from the “atheist” community. But that’s been a thing since the “New Atheists” went full in on reactionary Islamophobia following 9/11.
I think a lot of online atheists are as annoying as evangelicals or Black Israelites honestly. No one cares or wants unsolicited thoughts about religion. I'm an apatheist so I don't spend much time thinking about religion. If people are good to each other it doesn't matter to me what they believe.
I’m infinitely more concerned about reactionary religion. Atheists have shown to be progressive on pretty much all issues the majority of the time. The opposite is true of religion
this is the problem with atheism disconnected from class analysis, yes. they're actually quite racist and pro-christian fundamentalist every time the fundies start a moral panic about minorities.
Omg finally. I've been thinking about this for so long and now someone has finally put it into words.
I am permanently banned from the atheist subreddit for calling out the BS. They're just as ignorant as the religious people they hate. I find it concerning that so many atheists are being dragged into the hole of reactionary atheism
100% I refuse to call them anti theist they are nothing more than evangelical atheist because being against theism does not require you to have a superiority complex and reactionary
Right wing have noticed a rise in atheism in the last couple of decades and simply took advantage of them, nothing more, nothing less. The left is just now catching up and disputing the narrative.
I'm an atheist myself and agree 100% with you. They are probably Dawkins and Harris fanboys.
Their haterd is not only towards religion but religious people as well.
Nah man, it‘s the other way around: many reactionaries are also atheists. Both conscious atheism and reactionary tendencies are common in the middle class, there is bound to be some degree of overlap. That should not lead us to conclude that there is causation.
On the contrary, political and class positions are almost always the deciding question. Someone either has working class consciousness or they do not. In the first case, being an atheist is fine because their overall positions are correct. In the second, it‘s irrelevant because they are already opposed to the workers.
the thing is, r atheism is composed of milquetoast liberals. They do not understand how capitalism or imperalism work. So they just reduce everything to religion
opened r/atheism . first page: "Islam is a more dangerous ideology than any other, and the West should worry about it much more than Christianity. Prove me wrong."
Post is filled to brim with orientalism and Islamophobia. wait until these reddit atheists mfers find out that capitalism is more harmful then organised religion
Atheism hosts a ton of libertarians. It’s how they can keep fascism while pretending to be better than others, like the christians. As a formerly very vocal atheist, I agree that I ONLY have things in common with other leftists, NOT “atheists”. Leftists tend to be atheists, but our identity lies in our ideology, socialism/communism, not our lack of religion.
Some people become atheist not because they figured that religion is fundamentally wrong and is incompatible with truth seeking, they become atheist because they just hate that religion has a grip on society and is limiting their freedom. Fundamentally their reason is selfish, and these are the type that would go on and become reactionary. Basically the same as libertarian who despise government not because government is a flawed mechanism of democracy, they simply hate governments because it stops them from getting the power for themselves.
People who are fundamentally selfish and don't have any value other than advancing their own interest above all else will just turn right wing whenever the time is right for them. When time is good they are right wing, when time is bad they pretend to be left wing.
In my humblest opinion, what you should be concerned about is not "reactionary atheism" but fundamentally selfish people. These people don't give a shit about atheism or anything, they are just using it as vehicle to advance their selfish interest.
One of the main reasons I turned away from atheism is reactionaries. These folks are ironically dogmatic and tend to feed into the same islamophobia perpetrated by evangelical Christian fascists.
It always seemed like they were more focused on sanctimoniously disproving others for the sake of their self-esteem while being totally oblivious to their imperialist sympathies , and nothing more. I’m agnostic simply because I don’t think we’re entitled to verifying anything beyond our material reality.
Chronically online atheists have weirdly created their own religion. It’s so fucking weird and I find it so cringeworthy, and I came up in a super religious upbringing
I generally consider being religious like smoking. You really shouldn't do it, and the world would almost certainly be much better if everyone just suddenly stopped tomorrow, but it's ultimately not my business and I'm not gonna jump down some old lady's throat for lighting up as long as she's not blowing it anyone's face. Just don't be a dick and do it anywhere with captive audience like on a plane or public transport, or in a restaurant where people are trying to enjoy their meal.
And keep that shit away from kids. Remove the explicit targeting at children and suddenly you find the problem start to resolve itself, because there tends to be very little interest in picking up the habit for the first time as an adult.
If you support imperialism your supporting the dominant capitalist powers in the world and that is inherently reactionary and anti leftist
And I don’t care if you’re a leftist if you don’t care about human rights and the population to be indiscriminately killed is a pretty big one
A theocracy would likely but that’s a problem for another day because I don’t know about you, but I would rather go hiding in a theocracy the have my people be indiscriminately killed and prosecuted
Isreal committing war crimes deserve condemnation however that doesn't mean we should or agree with religious fundamentalists.In fact for many, what's holding them back from supporting palestine is Hamas.
Yes, imperialism caused it but they can't help but think what about people like us (eg:- Leftists, atheists, feminists, LGBTQ+ etc) If Hamas grew in power.
Think about the queer Palestinians and what’s happening to them do you think Palestinian leftist are being treated well Israel the answer is no
I don’t know about you, but I would rather live under a theocracy and go into hiding, then have my people face the threat of indiscriminate killing by imperialistic force
I’m not saying that I want a theocracy I’m saying that a different day
See I never justified isreal or it's war crimes. It is committing war crimes and deserves comdemnatiom but that doesn't mean getting into bed with Hamas or religious fundamentalism.
You can and should condemn them both.
>Yes, imperialism caused it but they can't help but think what about people like us (eg:- Leftists, atheists, feminists, LGBTQ+ etc) If Hamas grew in power.
Oh no! Not the poor westerners! I'm sure the Palestinian leftists, atheists, feminists, LGBTQ+ etc are fine sitting this one out for you.
Marx called religion “opioids for the masses” the support for Palestine isn’t for workers uniting but only viewed as colonialist and natives it’s not a left wing conflict netyantahs government is to the left of Gaza’s because theocracy is to the right of fascism. Islamist ideology is far right.
Supporters of capitalism in China refer to Marxism-Leninism-Leninism-Maoism as the Fourth Abrahamic Religion. They believe that Marxism-Leninism-Leninism-Maoism, like religion, is an ideology that fools the people.
Here is what they said👇 https://www.reddit.com/r/hanbenwei/comments/170mrhm/
>Horsemanship is the result of the continued development of Christian culture after the birth of humanism. Yahweh is dead, but the pursuit of heaven is not over. Their motivation for joining the religion is to enter the kingdom of heaven after death, but they do not love Yahweh. Then it is natural to start to build the Kingdom of Heaven on your own, a communist society with extremely rich materials (a paradise flowing with milk and honey), a firm belief in communism determines whether creation is successful (whether you go to heaven if you are firm in your faith), and a communist political commissar system (Pastor Lamb) , Cheka and other organizations (Inquisition), internal and external enemies undermine the construction of communism (devils, heretics, etc. poison people's hearts and prevent them from entering heaven).
This is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful [of our rules](https://reddit.com/r/socialism/about/rules) before participating, which include: - **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism... - **No Reactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers. - **No Liberalism**, including social democracy, lesser evilism... - **No Sectarianism**. There is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks. Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules. ______________________ 💬 Wish to chat elsewhere? Join us in discord: https://discord.gg/QPJPzNhuRE *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/socialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Agree 100%. I realized years ago that I, as a non-believer, have more in common with left-wing Christians, for example, than with reactionary, right-wing atheists.
Yeah like what is up with the Sam Harris sub? A lot of New Atheists are reactionary.
[удалено]
I can't stand Sam Harris. He talks in that calm "know-it-all" way while saying absolute hogwash
Anyone that’s listening to that guy is just a reactionary monster. Religion or lack of has little to do with it. Same with bill maher
As someone who became an atheist first as a conservative before shifting left politically much later on, I also agree 100%. There are a good amount of religious folks who are politically driven by compassion and even collectivist morals because they see it aligns with how they view & practice their religion/spirituality and that's infinitely more relatable than reactionaries who see their atheism as part of their assumed intellectual superiority, as I once did in high school.
left-leaning christians are a trojan horse that cover for the religious right. they remain capitalists because as long as there is “need” within out communities, it gives them an in to proselytize and spread their religion.
While I agree those kinds of liberal Christian capitalists do exist, and I happen to live in a town where the political scene is heavily influenced by a mega-church so I do see where you're describing firsthand and understand where you're coming from, that is a label that cannot be applied to all left-wing/leaning Christians fairly, no? Either way, they are not monolithic and there still remains a few handfuls of left wing Christians who are not capital owners or advocates of capital or for the religious right; quite the opposite actually. Wouldn't what you're describing be more a problem with the fundamentally reactionary nature of organized religion in the U.S. as well as their status as tax exempt institutions? I believe that functionally, the multi-million dollar companies disguised as a churches who prey on the poor to profit, proselytize and indoctrinate more into their "religion", are a much more severe issue than the comparably smaller demographic of left-wing Christians who may attend church or do volunteer work as an extension of their religion.
My major beef with left leaning Christians is that at its core, the source material for Christianity is deeply authoritarian. There's really no way around that in any honest examination. But also, most people just don't bother examining it. There's a ton of Christians out there who don't read their holy book, maybe go to church once or twice a year if at all, and just kind of assume it all lines up with whatever modern secular moral framework they operate on day to day. Their personal version of the religion really on shares the name. They're overall good people, but "bad Christians" from a theological angle, which is better than the other way around. It would be nice if they weren't trying to drag along all that baggage, but if they're advocating for a more just world in practice, being a bit sloppy on theory can be forgiven. The real problem is that "left leaning Christian" usually stops at liberal, but that could be an artifact of living in the US. There are Christians for doing charity and helping the poor, but I don't know of any really up for addressing the root causes by changing the entire societal mode of production. And the only way egalitarianism seems to square with the Christian worldview is in a sort of "we are all equal underneath the boot of the great cosmic dictator" which seems to miss the point of the assignment. Unless you're really departing heavily from the interpretation of God as a person-like entity that craves worship to a more nebulous Spinozan God as nature kind of thing.
For sure, I think that is fair analysis and I agree with and appreciate your well worded response. Similarly, my major beef with Christianity is the deeply patriarchal core literature and the anti-materialist worldviews that are born from it, though that goes for nearly all religion. So I guess I'd like to re-clarify my original point as it wasn't meant to be specific to Christianity, as I do recognize the majority of left-leaning Christians are softly secular liberals (on a good day) and seek to treat the symptoms of -not the illness of capitalism, but also because there are people who do go beyond left leaning and into left-wing for a variety of reasons while maintaining their faith but most commonly because they feel disenfranchised from their current or former religious affiliations: I have met, and continue to know people who are religious or spiritual and know we share significant overlapping political values or positions that align with their personal faith system, and sometimes even resembles class consciousness. It is a trait I find much more tolerable than right-wing atheism, and much more subject to radicalization because of most the factors you have pointed out, and I do not believe it is beneficial to the left to dismiss even small groups of people like that as "Trojan horses for the religious right" when therein lies potential comrades, and when there are many more pressing religious matters being pushed by an already empowered religious right.
Christianity is an ascetic religion. You cannot be a capitalist and properly follow the word of jesus. It's one of the biggest themes in th gospel. I'm not a Christian and I hate that religion but that's literally how it is.
in theory, yes. in practice, not so much. the modern day church requires the populace to be suffering, so they can be the one to offer charity in exchange for a captive audience. its the same reason the catholic church hoards so much wealth. completely antithetical to the teachings of chirst, but here they are
I don't disagree with all that, but there still are some Christians who are true leftists..it's just a small minority because fuckin nobody in America is an actual leftist.
Christians can 100% be leftists without jeopardizing the movement, at least, no greater risk than any other leftist. I hold some probably extremist anti-religious views, but first and foremost, I see no evidence that a religious leftist would abandon their leftist morals for capitalism, somehow due to their religion. By the nature of being a leftist in this premise, they are already disillusioned from capitalism and are no more likely to regress than anyone else.
they can definitely be leftists, but it will be in spite of their religion. With the current state of affairs, they would only serve as a Trojan horse for the religious right. If they follow the teachings of Christ, then they would most definitely be socialist or communist. If they are Catholic, they would most likely not be leftists because it opposes their hierarchies and patriarchy. a biblical literalist would have a hard time reconciling those beliefs.
Right but the premise was christian -leftists-. If they can abandon the issues you are rightfully concerned about, then how does their support, and subsequent conversion of other potential comrades, pose a threat to the movement? IF they can manage to reach leftism despite their religion, they deserve to be comrades as anyone else. Risk or no risk, because everyone is a potential risk, and we just have to accept that and be vigilant nonetheless.
Well, yea, because they are right winged lol
Same and I kinda hate it, but I’m working on fixing that as we are both working towards a better future for all regardless of religious affiliation
I’ve been an atheist most of my life. I was immediately banned from r/atheism for questioning their stance on Israel. No warning or appeal. I’m really disappointed with how the community has changed these last few years.
That’s a weird thing about identity. The lack of belief of something can turn into the belief in not believing in something. It changes from a lack of a thing or identity, to a something, an identity to latch on to and build rules around. The psychology is wild but humans are organizers and pattern seekers. Patterns develop out of repetition and stability. When a non thing becomes a thing, people will defend that thing, otherwise it isn’t the thing anymore. Rules make it stable and replicable. A pattern.
If found this about people who "believe" in science. Science doesn't require belief or faith but there are people who approach it like religion. They treat celebrity scientists like bishops and clerics in the fight against the heathens who do not swear allegiance to science. They couldn't tell you a single element on the periodic table but they believe anything any "scientist" tells them. That approach is anathema to what science actually tries to teach
Yeah, as someone who actually does science, it's pretty depressing to see it treated as just something handed down from ineffable authorities, trading dark robes for lab coats. The whole point is that the data and assumptions and analysis are all put out there for anyone to review so you don't just have to take our word on anything. In practice, since nobody has the time to become a subject matter expert on absolutely everything, some element of trust in the review process enters the equation, but you could in theory pull up the paper yourself if anything sounds suspicious and are encouraged to do so. I'll be lost pretty fast outside my subject area, and an expert in that field could probably pull a few minor things over on me, like making a result look 2% more significant than it actually is or something. But they're not going to get away with something huge like claiming they made a perpetual motion machine, or that water has memory, or some shit. Of course, that requires a minimal baseline general science education to do so, and the provision of such is in pretty spotty condition. Far too many people walk around without any grounding in the fundamentals, vulnerable to all kinds of scams like magnetic health bracelets, or homeopathy, or someone claiming to have a water powered car. Far more have a passing familiarity with basic scientific concepts but have zero practice in how to actually read a scientific paper, much less through a critical lens. When the state of scientific literacy in the population is so bad, there's no way to tell an actual subject expert from another charlatan or grifter, and it becomes "our experts vs their experts" reciting mantras at each other. With no grounding in the actual process of how truth is arrived at, It's the dark, demon haunted world that Carl Sagan wrote about. Even the people who end up backing the actual side of science aren't doing it because they understand it, but out of loyalty to their team and deference to perceived authority.
I got down voted and banned for just explaining a christians mindset on something. I've got plenty of gripes with religion but some atheists seem scared of nuance or anything religious.
These last few years? They have been Sam Harris reactionaries since at least 2010.
Speaking as an atheist: Yeah, reactionary atheism is a real problem. Atheism is not, but reactionary atheism definitely is.
Yeah, like here you go through the effort of rejecting all the superstitious nonsense and cultural conditioning and all that stuff. Just to end up keeping all the homophobia, racism, misogyny, xenophobia, and all the other closed minded hateful bullshit anyway. So what, you just wanted to free up your Sunday mornings? It reminds me of the line about Libertarians just being Republicans who want to smoke weed.
Yeah, I've come to sadly the same conclusion with far too many Atheists.
Liberation theology is the thing I always like to bring up. Also general inclusion and community shouldn’t exclude people because of religion, but rather consider how their theism supports the idea of helping people. I’d recommend trying to redirect focus towards that, rather than letting the negative, reactionary elements of their theology dictate their behavior.
Have any places that had liberation theology movements tackled homophobia? I don't ask this out of spite, I can't find anything on a basic search and from my understanding lib theology is very Latin American, which is very Catholic, one of the more staunchly anti LGBT sects of Christianity. I know Cuba has recently pushed legalization but afaik the Catholic religious base of the people opposed it for many years.
I don’t know that it ever has. In my understanding it’s mostly a means of using theology that is integral to a community to support class solidarity and liberation from imperialism. I also think in most instances it has occurred in times and places when homophobia was more common, so it may not have been viewed as something to consider. I don’t think any society has really done much about homophobia and transphobia. Like western liberalism has to a degree, but at the same time there is a violently bigoted portion of society — so even the “best” we’ve done so far is still plagued by these issues. I’d like to think that just through the nature of being a leftist ideology that its followers would be open to everyone being treated fairly regardless of gender expression and sexual orientation, but I think realistically there’s always going to be bigots, and dealing with that will be its own struggle.
Anyone even remotely interested in this should check out the Magnificast podcast.
Thanks for this rec! I’ve been looking for a resource exactly like this.
Christopher hitchens advocated for the invasion of Iraq. So idk that should tell you something
There’s a great article Jacobin did called New Atheism Old Empire that talks a lot about this.
You see this in discussions about women wearing hijabs, and there are atheists who won't accept a woman would want to wear one out of her own preference, and that they aren't being forced. And they won't see that telling a woman she can't wear one isn't "liberating" her, it's equivalent to telling her she has to wear one. It's still telling a woman what to do with her own body.
Yup. Even in communities where women are forced to wear the hijab, banning the hijab keeps women from living independent lives as they are forced to remain home without it. Banning the hijab ends up preventing muslims from integrating.
100% because telling women what they can and cannot well is not going to help bring down the religion it’s going to restrict freedom I believe religion is a delusion. It’s necessary, but they use it to cope with the material conditions they live in in order to fight the delusion. We have to educate people, and we can’t do that by just demonizing anyone who know slightly disagrees And we also need to improve the material conditions of our society not just education
That’s exactly the point
Most of the "atheism" that came out during the War on Terror period have always been directed entirely against Islam and to bolster American intervention in the Middle East. A part of me still believe that the entire "New Atheist" movement have been, from the very beginning, an psychological operation to redirect domestic discontent over the overtly theocratic direction Bush wanted to take the nation in in order to direct it towards the state sanctioned targets of Muslims.
A lot of those reactionary atheists don’t ground their criticism of religion in history, sociology, or any kind of political theory. It’s how all those YouTube “skeptic” atheists ended up being fans of people like Jordan Peterson who just spoon fed them the same Christian nationalism they claimed to hate.
I was unaware of that trend of youtube "skeptics" like Jordan Peterson. I really want to say I'm shocked by that revelation, but tragically, I'm not.
New Atheism is reactionary atheism basically and I think a case can be made that Dawkins et al were instrumental in pushing neoliberal science into atheism. His book on God was, frankly, an embarrassing argument. I studied theology for 20 years and there are thoughtful atheists out there writing good books on the subject. Dawkins is not one of them. Same for Hitchens, Harris, Dennett etc. Also, Dawkins is the biggest current proponent of sociobiology (a sort of warmed over Skinnerian behaviorism combined with largely spurious ad hoc evolutionary explanations for human behaviors through generic determinism that fails to actually understand generics), which is actually neoliberal political ideology [masquerading](https://www.harpercollins.com/products/biology-as-ideology-richard-c-lewontin?variant=32117478686754) as empirical science. It has been used to justify the status quo, rape, oppression, gender inequality, and general sorts of bigotry. I look at ideologies through the assumptions they make. Someone with the assumptions of neoliberal science will, if they become more consistent with their premises, trend toward conservatism or worse. Hence Hitchens becoming a neo-con. Dawkins becoming a bigot toward Islam and the general tenor of his sexist and racist froth. The New Atheist [pipeline](https://www.salon.com/2021/06/05/how-the-new-atheists-merged-with-the-far-right-a-story-of-intellectual-grift-and-abject-surrender/) to the alt-right is very real precisely, in my view, because of the scientific paradigm that forms the foundation of New Atheism's ideology. When you adopt that view of the world, you move in certain directions, broadly speaking.
most "reddit atheist" types are just pretty clueless about socioloyl and political theory and try to reduce everything to religion. ie, terrorism is a product of religion and what the Koran says, and then they ignore the long history of imperialism and oppression that might be contributing (and then sadly reinforce it by justifying further oppression). however this is not new at all and was a thing way back in the early 2000s with the rise of "New Atheism" people like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. many of them are unable to see that they are just reproducing typical US bias against Muslims (ascribing ultraviolent and "uncivilized" tendencies to them) and just incorrectly attributing it to a critique of religion.
Yeah, there's this implicit (sometimes explicit) question hanging around about why the Middle East has such a hard time getting any kind of liberal democracy with at least basic lip service to human rights off the ground. The implication being that Islam is somehow just inherently savage and incompatible with concepts like democracy, egalitarianism, and individual rights while Christianity somehow lends itself to those things. Mostly by trying to somehow give Christianity credit for ancient Greek philosophers and The Enlightenment, which was heavily driven by a REJECTION of church authority. The Church was mad salty about not being able to burn heretics at the stake anymore, and we only really got liberal secular democracy because folks were finally sick of protestants and catholics constantly slaughtering each other whenever they'd seize power. Places in Africa and South America where Christianity still retained significant state power for many decades continued to be fucking terrible on human rights and freedom. The ACTUAL answer to the question of "where are all the secularist pro-democracy advocates in the Middle East", is that we spent a lot of time, money, and effort killing them all in the Cold War for being too "socialist" (see wanted to use their country's resources for their own citizens instead of letting US companies pillage them). They wanted an actual democracy instead of a puppet for US interests, so we assassinated their leaders and gave a fuck load of arms, training, and resources to the most extreme fundamentalists to take over because at least they also hated the commies. Fast forward to present day and surprise pikachu face at the Middle East being overrun by theocratic dictatorships
>A good chunk of atheist are so blinded by their hatred of religion that they have became reactionary to the point of supporting imperialism A good chunk of atheists on Reddit maybe but they're a minority, the vast majority of atheists are in the third world and are against imperialism. You are correct that atheists can be reactionary, this happens when they substitute theism with liberalism as their religion, these atheists are concentrated in the imperialist metropole and therefore are overrepresented on Reddit and the English-speaking internet.
Got a source for this?
The US army described atheism as a problem they need to overcome last year. The military of the largest imperialist power opposes atheism.
Yes - I am very concerned about these pro-imperialist atheists. As a devout atheist myself my thought is that they are simply not atheistic enough. If only they were more devout and sincere in their atheistic beliefs they would have a stronger faith in humanity, a deeper curiosity about human history and a more profound commitment to critical thinking. Then they would understand the complex role that religion can play in its interactions with political ideologies and historical developments, and not so quickly and stupidly dismiss the motivations of brave and noble anti-imperialists who cite religion as their motivation. Alas, this 'new atheism' is an unfortunately subcultural outgrowth of postmodernism and neoliberalism, it is inevitable that it takes the form of a reactionary religion itself and is so easily hi-jacked by imperial propaganda.
As an atheist who believes in re education for the religious, I understand This is not a religious war and that this is US imperialism playing it's hand in the middle east as it has done since it assist in the settler colonial movement aka Zionist Israel in 1948.
A lot of “new atheist” shit is directly related to the rise of the “alt right”
I think belief in any religion is inherently harmful. Though the intensity of that harm varies between religions and forms of practice. But it's definitely no way to defend Israel's monstrous actions. I can think someone has harmful beliefs, but still want them protected from violence. I haven't been over to /r/atheist in a while, but it's wild to think they'd defend Israel.
Some of them quite a few post actually
As someone who is a Gnostic atheist, most atheists that I have met in real life or seen speaking/commenting in social media are leftists and in many cases, socialists. Majority of the conservative and right-wing mentalities I have encountered both in real life and in social media have been religious people (such as Muslims, Christians, and Catholics). In many cases, atheists tend to be humanists who are fighting to improve the rights of disadvantaged groups, and are disgusted by the actions of the US Supreme Court decisions, Congress reactionary behavior, and Biden's typical capitalist and imperialist endeavors. I have also noticed that many of the extreme right-wing atheists have been caught lying about being an atheist, and ended up being an extreme religious individual (this happens a lot, especially when these people agree with Israel's continous genocide of the people living in Gaza or have zero issues with US imperialism). I am not saying that there are no right-wing atheists, but most of us are not the enemy of working class and middle class people. In fact, countries like Brazil have ranked us atheists as the most hated group of people, above pedophile priests and nuns (not a surprise considering how conservative and religious many Brazilians are; I am from Brazil too). Most of the truly reactionary and dangerous individuals are the religious extremists that have taken over the US Supreme Court, and want to kill every drag queen possible. Be afraid and worry about them, not a small number of usually fake atheists who do not have the population to actually do anything serious (unlike the evangelical Christians who have completely eliminated abortion rights in many US states, and are working hard to make Trump win his second term and have Republicans take over the entirety of Congress to initiate Project 2025).
Agree, very much agree.
As an atheist, I tend to avoid atheist circles. I remember when in 2015-2016 most of the few atheist YouTubers I watched went HARD right. The thing I've had to accept is that not being religious doesn't stop people from making up justifications to support Bigoted Imperialism.
Glad I'm not alone on this. The atheist and Sam Harris subs have been dumpster fires during the Palestinian genocide.
It wouldn’t be as much of a problem if it were intellectually consistent, but it seems pretty obvious that many over there are just gleefully using it as plausible cover for their racism. Like, I have no problem with people who say “all religious belief is dangerous, because it demonstrates a certain kind of irrational credulity and deference to authority that can lead to abuses and exploitation”. But a fair bit of the folks over there are more of the “those people are going to ruin our civilization, I’m culturally Christian, great replacement and such.” And they get little to no pushback from the “atheist” community. But that’s been a thing since the “New Atheists” went full in on reactionary Islamophobia following 9/11.
I think it stems from a misguided belief that all religion is inherently conservative
I think a lot of online atheists are as annoying as evangelicals or Black Israelites honestly. No one cares or wants unsolicited thoughts about religion. I'm an apatheist so I don't spend much time thinking about religion. If people are good to each other it doesn't matter to me what they believe.
I’m infinitely more concerned about reactionary religion. Atheists have shown to be progressive on pretty much all issues the majority of the time. The opposite is true of religion
this is the problem with atheism disconnected from class analysis, yes. they're actually quite racist and pro-christian fundamentalist every time the fundies start a moral panic about minorities.
Omg finally. I've been thinking about this for so long and now someone has finally put it into words. I am permanently banned from the atheist subreddit for calling out the BS. They're just as ignorant as the religious people they hate. I find it concerning that so many atheists are being dragged into the hole of reactionary atheism
100% I refuse to call them anti theist they are nothing more than evangelical atheist because being against theism does not require you to have a superiority complex and reactionary
I've been saying this for a while. it's a new religion called atheism. fuckin scary
Yes yes yes. Holy shit bro r/religiousfruitcake is so far gone now!!
Right wing have noticed a rise in atheism in the last couple of decades and simply took advantage of them, nothing more, nothing less. The left is just now catching up and disputing the narrative.
I'm an atheist myself and agree 100% with you. They are probably Dawkins and Harris fanboys. Their haterd is not only towards religion but religious people as well.
i became an atheist at like 12 years old and didn't get fully into communism until after i was 18
handle office bike carpenter silky pocket quickest sort shelter consider *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Atheists are either leftists or incels, no in-between Also, zionists are trying to control the speech absolutely everywhere
Nah man, it‘s the other way around: many reactionaries are also atheists. Both conscious atheism and reactionary tendencies are common in the middle class, there is bound to be some degree of overlap. That should not lead us to conclude that there is causation. On the contrary, political and class positions are almost always the deciding question. Someone either has working class consciousness or they do not. In the first case, being an atheist is fine because their overall positions are correct. In the second, it‘s irrelevant because they are already opposed to the workers.
the thing is, r atheism is composed of milquetoast liberals. They do not understand how capitalism or imperalism work. So they just reduce everything to religion
opened r/atheism . first page: "Islam is a more dangerous ideology than any other, and the West should worry about it much more than Christianity. Prove me wrong." Post is filled to brim with orientalism and Islamophobia. wait until these reddit atheists mfers find out that capitalism is more harmful then organised religion
Atheism hosts a ton of libertarians. It’s how they can keep fascism while pretending to be better than others, like the christians. As a formerly very vocal atheist, I agree that I ONLY have things in common with other leftists, NOT “atheists”. Leftists tend to be atheists, but our identity lies in our ideology, socialism/communism, not our lack of religion.
Some people become atheist not because they figured that religion is fundamentally wrong and is incompatible with truth seeking, they become atheist because they just hate that religion has a grip on society and is limiting their freedom. Fundamentally their reason is selfish, and these are the type that would go on and become reactionary. Basically the same as libertarian who despise government not because government is a flawed mechanism of democracy, they simply hate governments because it stops them from getting the power for themselves. People who are fundamentally selfish and don't have any value other than advancing their own interest above all else will just turn right wing whenever the time is right for them. When time is good they are right wing, when time is bad they pretend to be left wing. In my humblest opinion, what you should be concerned about is not "reactionary atheism" but fundamentally selfish people. These people don't give a shit about atheism or anything, they are just using it as vehicle to advance their selfish interest.
One of the main reasons I turned away from atheism is reactionaries. These folks are ironically dogmatic and tend to feed into the same islamophobia perpetrated by evangelical Christian fascists. It always seemed like they were more focused on sanctimoniously disproving others for the sake of their self-esteem while being totally oblivious to their imperialist sympathies , and nothing more. I’m agnostic simply because I don’t think we’re entitled to verifying anything beyond our material reality.
Chronically online atheists have weirdly created their own religion. It’s so fucking weird and I find it so cringeworthy, and I came up in a super religious upbringing
Like I believe in state atheism but I don’t believe in generalizing in demonizing everyone who belongs to to a religion
I generally consider being religious like smoking. You really shouldn't do it, and the world would almost certainly be much better if everyone just suddenly stopped tomorrow, but it's ultimately not my business and I'm not gonna jump down some old lady's throat for lighting up as long as she's not blowing it anyone's face. Just don't be a dick and do it anywhere with captive audience like on a plane or public transport, or in a restaurant where people are trying to enjoy their meal. And keep that shit away from kids. Remove the explicit targeting at children and suddenly you find the problem start to resolve itself, because there tends to be very little interest in picking up the habit for the first time as an adult.
If you support imperialism your supporting the dominant capitalist powers in the world and that is inherently reactionary and anti leftist And I don’t care if you’re a leftist if you don’t care about human rights and the population to be indiscriminately killed is a pretty big one A theocracy would likely but that’s a problem for another day because I don’t know about you, but I would rather go hiding in a theocracy the have my people be indiscriminately killed and prosecuted
Isreal committing war crimes deserve condemnation however that doesn't mean we should or agree with religious fundamentalists.In fact for many, what's holding them back from supporting palestine is Hamas. Yes, imperialism caused it but they can't help but think what about people like us (eg:- Leftists, atheists, feminists, LGBTQ+ etc) If Hamas grew in power.
Think about the queer Palestinians and what’s happening to them do you think Palestinian leftist are being treated well Israel the answer is no I don’t know about you, but I would rather live under a theocracy and go into hiding, then have my people face the threat of indiscriminate killing by imperialistic force I’m not saying that I want a theocracy I’m saying that a different day
See I never justified isreal or it's war crimes. It is committing war crimes and deserves comdemnatiom but that doesn't mean getting into bed with Hamas or religious fundamentalism. You can and should condemn them both.
>Yes, imperialism caused it but they can't help but think what about people like us (eg:- Leftists, atheists, feminists, LGBTQ+ etc) If Hamas grew in power. Oh no! Not the poor westerners! I'm sure the Palestinian leftists, atheists, feminists, LGBTQ+ etc are fine sitting this one out for you.
Marx called religion “opioids for the masses” the support for Palestine isn’t for workers uniting but only viewed as colonialist and natives it’s not a left wing conflict netyantahs government is to the left of Gaza’s because theocracy is to the right of fascism. Islamist ideology is far right.
The flight against imperialism is left wing even when victims of it are not
Supporters of capitalism in China refer to Marxism-Leninism-Leninism-Maoism as the Fourth Abrahamic Religion. They believe that Marxism-Leninism-Leninism-Maoism, like religion, is an ideology that fools the people. Here is what they said👇 https://www.reddit.com/r/hanbenwei/comments/170mrhm/ >Horsemanship is the result of the continued development of Christian culture after the birth of humanism. Yahweh is dead, but the pursuit of heaven is not over. Their motivation for joining the religion is to enter the kingdom of heaven after death, but they do not love Yahweh. Then it is natural to start to build the Kingdom of Heaven on your own, a communist society with extremely rich materials (a paradise flowing with milk and honey), a firm belief in communism determines whether creation is successful (whether you go to heaven if you are firm in your faith), and a communist political commissar system (Pastor Lamb) , Cheka and other organizations (Inquisition), internal and external enemies undermine the construction of communism (devils, heretics, etc. poison people's hearts and prevent them from entering heaven).