Jesus was not impregnated by a deity, as both the Bible and Qur'an says. That story isn't true, opiate or not.
Of course, above I meant the "Virgin Mary," and not Jesus, impregnated by a deity -- two stories among many other fantastic fables shared in both the Qur'an and Bible. :/
Whether such untrue beliefs are "functional" in fomenting revolution or not is beside the point. They're both untrue. Georges Sorel believed (cynically, I think) in promoting the idea of the General Strike as not a practical goal but a religious/mythical Nirvana sort-of idea in workers' heads -- that is, to promote it as myth, whether they'd ever get to the General Strike or not. At least it'd get 'em going in the right direction, he sighed -- the way only myths and falsehoods seem to. The ends justify the means, in other words -- even if it's complicity with fabrication and falsehood.
Count me out of the "deception, but it's really for the people's own good" school of "revolution."
-B.
Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
Therefore, my "rule of thumb" in treatment religions is as follows:
If someone believes in fairy tales, Santa Claus, Invisible Hand and kindred figments of imagination - its is the job of a literary critic to analyze and critique it.
If someone acts on such beliefs - this becomes the job of a shrink.
If someone insists that others act on such beliefs - it is the job of a prosecutor or, if that fails, a revolutionary.