[lbo-talk] Marxism and Religion

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 2/27/07, Dwayne Monroe <idoru345 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yoshie:
>
> The conclusion that one comes to based on these facts
> is that the religion of Oscar Romero and and that of
> the Salvadoran Right are not the same, though they
> loosely belong to the same long-standing, extremely
> diverse and contradictory ideological tradition, just
> as Hugo Chavez's Marxism and Pol Pot's Marxism are not
> the same, though they loosely belong to the same
> longstanding, extremely diverse and contradictory
> ideological tradition.
>
> [...]
> ..................
>
> I don't have a mount in this wild hunt (Odin having
> revoked my license - off he flew on Sleipnir, towards
> the merciless, azure sky, laughing, that thoroughgoing
> bastard) but I did want to perk up and say that this
> strikes me as luminously good sense.  I fear however,
> that the rush and push of listserv frolics will cause
> it to be overlooked or unsweetly argued into oblivion.
>
> As I've stated before, my family is quite thoroughly
> Christian in outlook; I don't share their beliefs
> though I grew up deeply dipped and understand the
> importance of their beliefs to them.
>
> Following Yoshie, I note that Pat Robinson also calls
> himself a devout Christian.
>
> Needless to say, the Robinson style of Christianity
> and that of my family are separated by a vast gulf not
> unlike the span of light years between our talking
> monkey civilization and the breathtakingly beautiful
> M31 (aka Andromeda).
>
> What are we to make of this difference?

One thing that strikes me as interesting is a similarity between those
who are prejudiced against Marxism and those who are prejudiced
against religion.  How do they approach people, institutions, and
movements that contradict their respective beliefs?  In the same way.

People who are prejudiced against Marxism are sometimes capable of
recognizing that people, institutions, and movements from the Marxist
tradition can have good ideas and do good works, and people who are
prejudiced against religion are likewise sometimes capable of
recognizing that people, institutions, and movements from this or that
religious tradition can have good ideas and do good works.

But they do not let that recognition affect their basic prejudices.
The way they handle the contradiction between their belief and reality
is to think that Marxists (or religious people) who have good ideas
and do good works do so _despite_ their Marxism (or religion) while
chalking up all or most bad ideas held and bad deeds done by some
Marxists (or some religious people) to their Marxism (or religion).
In other words, they don't give credit to Marxism (or religion) when
they see good Marxists (or good religious people), but they
unfailingly debit from Marxism (or religion) when they see bad
Marxists (or bad religious people).

In doing so, they continue to regard their respective offending system
of belief as a sin.  When they see people who are committed to an
offending system of belief having good ideas or doing good things,
they forgive the sinners while still hating the sin.  :->

Instead of that, why not give credit where credit is due?  Some
people, it seems to me, have good ideas and do good deeds at least in
part because of, not despite, the nature of their Marxism or religion,
just as some people have bad ideas and do bad deeds at least in part
because of the nature of their Marxism or religion.  That makes sense,
since both Marxism and religion come in really great variety.
-- 
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>