I hear a lot of people talk about how we need to look at religion from a materialist lens and that religion is incomparable with socialism. But I think we need to seperate the two. Religion is about the metaphysical so it’s hard to look at it from a materialist lens. While politics deals with materialist matters, so it’s necessary to view it with a materialist lens. And it’s not like atheism is fully materialist either, with ‘nothing after death’, and ‘universe starting without a god’ being metaphysical explanations as well. And humans are naturally spiritual and to deny that, makes it harder for socialism to be accepted by people. But of course that doesn’t mean we should tolerate the reactionary aspects of religion. We should combat it whenever necessary.
What’s your opinion?
Religion is not torture, religious people can use it for torture but that’s the fault of the people, not the religion
I’m an atheist but I think we should respect people’s religious beliefs. If someone is a good socialist then it shouldn’t matter if they are religious or not, being anti-religious will only make religious people avoid socialism for no real reason, we don’t get anything by being anti-religious.
I mean, of course we shouldn’t let religious institutions have power as they are usually quite reactionary, but the religious beliefs of people should be respected in my opinion.
I agree. Religion is something personal, and religious institutions only push one ‘correct’ view
Just so other people don’t get the wrong idea from my comments, I don’t have any issue with the personal practice of religion either. If you find particular religious practices or values personally helpful, great!
I think the problems are when religion either is forced on others (evangelizing can be really disrespectful — I’ve seen Christian evangelization at a Jewish dinner) or preying on its followers (taking the little money that poor people have)
with ‘nothing after death’, and ‘universe starting without a god’ being metaphysical explanations as well.
Uh, no? This is such a weird, confused argument. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god, which is the natural, intuitive stance to hold in the world we live in where there is no evidence of any gods. No “metaphysical explanations” required. Show me evidence of a god and I’ll change my view, just like with everything else.
And humans are naturally spiritual
I mock people who bring up “human nature” arguments in any other circumstance, I don’t know why it would be different here. You’re not “naturally spiritual” you’ve been indoctrinated into a system of beliefs by people motivated by their material interests.
But there’s also no proof that god doesn’t exist, so the actual materialist thing to do is to be agnostic
But humans ARE naturally spiritual, spirituality literally goes back tens of thousands of years, and maybe even longer. And this was before hierarchy existed.
But we are talking about the beginning of the universe, something that we don’t understand yet. So in that way the existence of god, and god not existing are both metaphysical explanations
In that case christians who are open to the idea of being wrong are also agnostic. You could use agnostic as an adjective to atheism, but I believe agnostic, as a noun, is the way to be truly materialist
I think that one philosopher said it best (paraphrasing because I’m no good at quotemining): in order to make religion less shitty, we need to do something about the shitty conditions that gave rise to it.
I don’t think metaphysics is real though. The material world is all there is. When I say there is nothing after death, I mean that the chemistry inside your body that makes you alive stops functioning, and that’s all that happens.
EDIT: to be clear, I’m not anti-religion. It’s just that powerful people have a habit of using religious thinking for self-aggrandizement, shutting down criticism, and for justifying exploitation. It’s not a coincidence that missionaries came hand in hand with colonizers
I’m a Socialist that believes in Advaita Vedanta.
I’ve come to understand life and society through a foundational truth: beneath our diverse experiences, backgrounds, and roles, there’s an undeniable shared essence that ties us together. This understanding isn’t derived from mere philosophical musings, but from an intrinsic observation of the world and its workings.
For me, the idea of any individual being lesser or more based on arbitrary societal constructs contradicts this core essence. It’s not a matter of idealism; it’s about coherence and consistency. Given this, the glaring disparities in resources, power, and opportunities present in our society don’t just seem unjust—they seem illogical.
My belief is simple and grounded: if at our very core we all share a common thread, then fairness and equity aren’t lofty aspirations. They’re logical necessities. Our societal structures and systems should be designed to reflect this truth, ensuring that each individual’s worth is recognized and that opportunities are equitably distributed.
This is not about charity or temporary fixes. It’s about re-envisioning and realigning society in a manner that resonates with the profound truth of our shared essence.
