The God in Communism: Karl Marx religious?

[Aclion]

His labour theory of value was pretty much plagiarized from St. Thomas Aquina's.

[Sanctissima]

Well, he was a pretty devout Lutheran prior to going full Commie, so you may have a point OP.

And there are many aspects of his philosophy that were heavily influenced by his prior religious beliefs, notably his hatred of the Jews.

[AiliailiA]

I think your talking nonsense OP.

First of all, Marx was Jewish, so I'm not sure why you would think "Marx's works look so similar to Christianity." But that's actually a fairly minor point compared to the general problem that you clearly haven't understood Marx's critique of religion at all.

Marx's issue with religion isn't that it is untrue (although he probably thought so), it's that it causes people to ignore injustice because they think that some heavenly power will one day even it out. When Marx calls religion an opiate, he is saying that religion acts as a painkiller that allows people to ignore serious chronic conditions. And the only way to get them to seek out the treatment they need is to remove the painkiller.

To quote Marx:
"Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower."

^This.

I will only add that opium wasn't as negatively regarded then as it is now, addiction not being recognized as such a problem. Marx refers to its painkilling role and the happiness of opium being illusory, but there is no taint of addiction or lives being ruined so "opium of the people" is even less harsh towards religion than it may sound to a modern ear.

As well as the context making it less harsh. The OP can be excused for not understanding, as the quote is VERY OFTEN taken out of context, being a key part of the case that Communism is always violently atheistic.

[Neanderthaland]

Well, he was a pretty devout Lutheran prior to going full Commie, so you may have a point OP.

And there are many aspects of his philosophy that were heavily influenced by his prior religious beliefs, notably his hatred of the Jews.

No he wasn't. His father only converted to Lutheranism so that he could practice law. Something that wasn't possible for Jews at the time.

Marx was brought up in a secular Jewish household.

[Kubra]

His labour theory of value was pretty much plagiarized from St. Thomas Aquina's.

what, the guy who stole it from Aristotle?

[Risottia]

Now this might sound like complete heresy but I personally think that Marx was extremely religious at one point and something happened to him which cause him to hate god (maybe a family death?) and when he published his manifesto he made sure some of it was dedicated to destroying god.

1.You never read the Manifesto of the Communist Party, did you?
2.Marx did NOT hate "god". Marx was an atheist - just like most philosophers of the Hegelian Left (I guess you haven't read Fichte, did you?) - and thinking a thing doesn't exist means you cannot really hate it.

[Sanctissima]

Well, he was a pretty devout Lutheran prior to going full Commie, so you may have a point OP.

And there are many aspects of his philosophy that were heavily influenced by his prior religious beliefs, notably his hatred of the Jews.

No he wasn't. His father only converted to Lutheranism so that he could practice law. Something that wasn't possible for Jews at the time.

Marx was brought up in a secular Jewish household.

Secular Jewish household?

The man's father was a devoutly patriotic Prussian Lutheran, and from his writings and discourse it is clear that Karl was an anti-Semite. How on earth can that be interpreted as being "Secular Jewish"?

[Constantinopolis]

First of all, Marx was Jewish,

Point of order: Marx was ethnically Jewish, but his parents had actually converted from Judaism to Lutheran Christianity before Karl was born, presumably because that was required for social advancement in Prussia at the time (although it may have been out of genuine conviction; we don't know). Karl Marx was never raised in a religious Jewish environment.

Edit: Welp, I was ninja'd on that point several times over.

[Constantinopolis]

Secular Jewish household?

The man's father was a devoutly patriotic Prussian Lutheran, and from his writings and discourse it is clear that Karl was an anti-Semite. How on earth can that be interpreted as being "Secular Jewish"?

Karl thought that Jewish culture was awful and argued that Jews should stop being Jewish and assimilate into the broader society they lived in (i.e. basically what his father had done). That may sound anti-Semitic to our 21st century ears, but at the time, arguing that Jews could and should assimilate (that is, arguing that they weren't an inherently alien and foreign group destined to forever cause social problems) counted as taking a stance in defense of the Jews.

The spectrum of opinion about the Jews in 19th century Europe was a lot like... the spectrum of opinion about Muslims in present-day Europe, actually:

Right-wing view: They are foreign and alien, they can never adapt to our ways, they are a danger to our civilization and we must keep a close eye on them. And maybe find a way to get rid of them.
Left-wing view: It's okay, they're not so different from us, they can just assimilate and become more like us - you'll see!

[Sanctissima]

Secular Jewish household?

The man's father was a devoutly patriotic Prussian Lutheran, and from his writings and discourse it is clear that Karl was an anti-Semite. How on earth can that be interpreted as being "Secular Jewish"?

Karl thought that Jewish culture was awful and argued that Jews should stop being Jewish and assimilate into the broader society they lived in (i.e. basically what his father had done). That may sound anti-Semitic to our 21st century ears, but at the time, arguing that Jews could and should assimilate (that is, arguing that they weren't an inherently alien and foreign group destined to forever cause social problems) counted as taking a stance in defense of the Jews.

The spectrum of opinion about the Jews in 19th century Europe was a lot like... the spectrum of opinion about Muslims in present-day Europe, actually:

Right-wing view: They are foreign and alien, they can never adapt to our ways, they are a danger to our civilization and we must keep a close eye on them. And maybe find a way to get rid of them.
Left-wing view: It's okay, they're not so different from us, they can just assimilate and become more like us - you'll see!

Oh fuck off with this bull shit.

To quote the man directly from a letter he wrote to Engels regarding Ferdinand Lassalle, a Socialist rival of his:

"It is now perfectly clear to me that, as the shape of his head and the growth of his hair indicate, he is descendant from the negroes who joined in the flight of Moses from Egypt (unless his mother or grandmother on the father’s side was crossed with a nigger). Now this union of Jewishness to Germanness on a negro basis was bound to produce an extraordinary hybrid. The importunity of the fellow is also niggerlike."

So it is clear that on top of being anti-Semitic as all hell, he was also a racist.

[Constantinopolis]

But as for the OP:

1. Karl Marx was never religious as far as anyone knows. He was raised in a nominally Lutheran household that never took religion very seriously. He may not have always been an atheist, but it's fair to assume that he at least grew up agnostic.

2. Karl Marx didn't "hate god". He criticized religion for the institutional role it plays in society. That is to say, he never actually argued that religion is false (he certainly believed that it was false, but never made any argument for this view; he simply took it for granted). He only argued that religion has negative effects on society (along with some positive ones, but more negative than positive).

3. Karl Marx didn't want to "destroy god" or even destroy religious faith. He claimed that religion would naturally disappear in the course of human social development. He argued that religion played a social function that was needed in the past, but that this function is quickly becoming obsolete and therefore religion will fade away. It was other, later Marxists that decided this process needed to be speeded along.

4. You can be a Marxist without agreeing with Marx's opinions on religion. Marx built the foundations of Marxism - historical materialism, class struggle as the driver of social change, advocacy for revolutionary communism - but he is not some kind of ultimate authority. In fact, there isn't a single Marxist living today who agrees with Marx on everything. The school of Marxism that agreed with Marx on everything was called Orthodox Marxism, and it pretty much ceased to exist in the aftermath of World War I.

[Constantinopolis]

Karl thought that Jewish culture was awful and argued that Jews should stop being Jewish and assimilate into the broader society they lived in (i.e. basically what his father had done). That may sound anti-Semitic to our 21st century ears, but at the time, arguing that Jews could and should assimilate (that is, arguing that they weren't an inherently alien and foreign group destined to forever cause social problems) counted as taking a stance in defense of the Jews.

The spectrum of opinion about the Jews in 19th century Europe was a lot like... the spectrum of opinion about Muslims in present-day Europe, actually:

Right-wing view: They are foreign and alien, they can never adapt to our ways, they are a danger to our civilization and we must keep a close eye on them. And maybe find a way to get rid of them.
Left-wing view: It's okay, they're not so different from us, they can just assimilate and become more like us - you'll see!

Oh fuck off with this bull shit.

To quote the man directly from a letter he wrote to Engels regarding Ferdinand Lassalle, a Socialist rival of his:

"It is now perfectly clear to me that, as the shape of his head and the growth of his hair indicate, he is descendant from the negroes who joined in the flight of Moses from Egypt (unless his mother or grandmother on the father’s side was crossed with a nigger). Now this union of Jewishness to Germanness on a negro basis was bound to produce an extraordinary hybrid. The importunity of the fellow is also niggerlike."

So it is clear that on top of being anti-Semitic as all hell, he was also a racist.

Holy shit! A 19th century man wrote a bunch of racist insults about a rival in a private letter to a friend! This is shocking! Who else in the 19th century would say something like this?

Oh right... everyone.

"There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas..." -- Abraham Lincoln, 1857

"The Celts are not among the progressive, initiative races, but among those which supply the materials rather than the impulse of history...The Persians, the Greeks, the Romans and the Teutons are the only makers of history, the only authors of advancement. ...Subjection to a people of a higher capacity for government is of itself no misfortune; and it is to most countries the condition of their political advancement." -- Lord Acton, 1862

"It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but ‘a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla’ and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro." -- Charles Darwin, 1871

And note: Those were public statements, in speech or writing. I didn't take the time to go search for quotes from private letters.

It was taken for granted by practically everyone in the 19th century that human "races" existed, that some races were better than others (if not overall, at least at doing specific things), and that it was acceptable to make racist insults (at least in private).

Next you'll presumably condemn Aristotle for endorsing slavery. People are products of their time.

[Sanctissima]

Oh fuck off with this bull shit.

To quote the man directly from a letter he wrote to Engels regarding Ferdinand Lassalle, a Socialist rival of his:

"It is now perfectly clear to me that, as the shape of his head and the growth of his hair indicate, he is descendant from the negroes who joined in the flight of Moses from Egypt (unless his mother or grandmother on the father’s side was crossed with a nigger). Now this union of Jewishness to Germanness on a negro basis was bound to produce an extraordinary hybrid. The importunity of the fellow is also niggerlike."

So it is clear that on top of being anti-Semitic as all hell, he was also a racist.

Holy shit! A 19th century man wrote a bunch of racist insults about a rival in a private letter to a friend! This is shocking! Who else in the 19th century would say something like this?

Oh right... everyone.

"There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas..." -- Abraham Lincoln, 1857

"The Celts are not among the progressive, initiative races, but among those which supply the materials rather than the impulse of history...The Persians, the Greeks, the Romans and the Teutons are the only makers of history, the only authors of advancement. ...Subjection to a people of a higher capacity for government is of itself no misfortune; and it is to most countries the condition of their political advancement." -- Lord Acton, 1862

"It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but ‘a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla’ and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro." -- Charles Darwin, 1871

And note: Those were public statements, in speech or writing. I didn't take the time to go search for quotes from private letters.

It was taken for granted by practically everyone in the 19th century that human "races" existed, that some races were better than others (if not overall, at least at doing specific things), and that it was acceptable to make racist insults (at least in private).

Then don't demonize the Right for this shit while playing Devil's advocate for the Left. It is plainly obvious that Marx was a racist anti-Semite, just like most German Idealists from both ends of the political spectrum. He clearly did not believe that Jews "[weren't] so different" from other people or that "they can just assimilate". It is blatantly obvious that he completely and unconditionally hated them, just like his counterparts on the Right of the political spectrum at this time.

It's extremely intellectually dishonest to try and downplay the fact that Marx was an anti-Semite.

[Constantinopolis]

Holy shit! A 19th century man wrote a bunch of racist insults about a rival in a private letter to a friend! This is shocking! Who else in the 19th century would say something like this?

Oh right... everyone.

"There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas..." -- Abraham Lincoln, 1857

"The Celts are not among the progressive, initiative races, but among those which supply the materials rather than the impulse of history...The Persians, the Greeks, the Romans and the Teutons are the only makers of history, the only authors of advancement. ...Subjection to a people of a higher capacity for government is of itself no misfortune; and it is to most countries the condition of their political advancement." -- Lord Acton, 1862

"It has been asserted that the ear of man alone possesses a lobule; but ‘a rudiment of it is found in the gorilla’ and, as I hear from Prof. Preyer, it is not rarely absent in the negro." -- Charles Darwin, 1871

And note: Those were public statements, in speech or writing. I didn't take the time to go search for quotes from private letters.

It was taken for granted by practically everyone in the 19th century that human "races" existed, that some races were better than others (if not overall, at least at doing specific things), and that it was acceptable to make racist insults (at least in private).

Then don't demonize the Right for this shit while playing Devil's advocate for the Left. It is plainly obvious that Marx was a racist anti-Semite, just like most German Idealists from both ends of the political spectrum. He clearly did not believe that Jews "[weren't] so different" from other people or that "they can just assimilate". It is blatantly obvious that he completely and unconditionally hated them, just like his counterparts on the Right of the political spectrum at this time.

It's extremely intellectually dishonest to try and downplay the fact that Marx was an anti-Semite.

The point is that he wasn't an anti-Semite by the standards of his time. That is to say, he was no more anti-Semitic than the average European political thinker of his time. Or, like you said: "...just like most German Idealists from both ends of the political spectrum."

If your point is simply that Karl Marx shared the common prejudices and ways of thinking that most people shared in his social group during his lifetime, then yeah, of course that's true, but what of it? The ancient Greek philosophers generally supported adult men raping teenage boys. Is that relevant in some way? I don't see how. People are products of their time.

No doubt there is some opinion that all of us are holding today that will look utterly disgusting to future generations. Okay. So?

[The Grene Knyght]

(Image)

Now this might sound like complete heresy but I personally think that Marx was extremely religious at one point and something happened to him which cause him to hate god (maybe a family death?) and when he published his manifesto he made sure some of it was dedicated to destroying god. I'm not saying his whole purpose of the manifesto was to destroy god....I'm just saying that he knew his works would be respected so why not push a few hidden agendas under it? why else would Marx's works look so similar to Christianity? ....it just all adds up.

What do you guys think?

I don't see anything that backs any of this up in anyway. I think, and this is entirely speculation, you are just attributing such ideas to him because you're trying to mold his beliefs to fit your own and you're trying to rationalise his mistrust of religion in that framework. If thats true, the simple soloution is not to hold Marx in such high regard. There's plenty of socialists who certainly did believe in god. In fact I've been reading some bits from Saint Thomas More's (arguably) proto-socialist book, Utopia.

[Sanctissima]

Then don't demonize the Right for this shit while playing Devil's advocate for the Left. It is plainly obvious that Marx was a racist anti-Semite, just like most German Idealists from both ends of the political spectrum. He clearly did not believe that Jews "[weren't] so different" from other people or that "they can just assimilate". It is blatantly obvious that he completely and unconditionally hated them, just like his counterparts on the Right of the political spectrum at this time.

It's extremely intellectually dishonest to try and downplay the fact that Marx was an anti-Semite.

The point is that he wasn't an anti-Semite by the standards of his time. That is to say, he was no more anti-Semitic than the average European political thinker of his time. Or, like you said: "...just like most German Idealists from both ends of the political spectrum."

If your point is simply that Karl Marx shared the common prejudices and ways of thinking that most people shared in his social group during his lifetime, then yeah, of course that's true, but what of it? The ancient Greek philosophers generally supported adult men raping teenage boys. Is that relevant in some way? I don't see how. People are products of their time.

My original point was that Marx's vehement disgust of Jews clearly demonstrates how ridiculous it is to consider him Jewish. I sincerely doubt most Rabbis would consider an Anti-Semite Jewish, even if such a man had Jewish ethnicity in their blood.

But since you brought up this apologism for Marx's views on the matter, and apparently have the innate need to demonize the Right for this same attitude being prevalent amongst their ranks in the 19th century, claiming that Marx and the Left were somehow better in this regard, I find it worth pointing out your BS. And even then, other people being racist anti-semitic shits does not excuse oneself of having such opinions, even if they are the majority. Nor does rampant pedophilia amongst Greek philosophers excuse any individual one of them from being a degenerate hedonistic craven. People are not uniquely products of their society. They have the capacity to think for themselves, and if they decide to be racists or anti-Semites or pedophiles, that is indeed a reflection of their character and reason to judge them, even if most of their contemporaries share their opinions or lifestyles.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Little did anyone know, but Marx worshipped the Daedra.

[Constantinopolis]

My original point was that Marx's vehement disgust of Jews clearly demonstrates how ridiculous it is to consider him Jewish.

And if you'll recall, my very first post in this thread pointed out that Karl Marx was ethnically Jewish but that he was never raised in the Jewish religious faith. Whether he counts as "Jewish" or not depends on what you mean by "Jewish" (whether you're talking about ancestry or culture/religion).

However, the funny thing is that by Judaism's own internal rules, Karl Marx was indeed a Jew, since his mother was born Jewish.

And even then, other people being racist anti-semitic shits does not excuse oneself of having such opinions, even if they are the majority. Nor does rampant pedophilia amongst Greek philosophers excuse any individual one of them from being a degenerate hedonistic craven. People are not uniquely products of their society. They have the capacity to think for themselves, and if they decide to be racists or anti-Semites or pedophiles, that is indeed a reflection of their character and reason to judge them, even if most of their contemporaries share their opinions or lifestyles.

.....................

Riiiiiiiight.

Word of advice: If time travel somehow gets invented, don't ever use it. You won't be able to get along with anyone outside your own historical period.

[Sanctissima]

Little did anyone know, but Marx worshipped the Daedra.

Truly he was a worshipper of the Prince of Schemes and Chaos himself, Molag Bal.

[Sanctissima]

My original point was that Marx's vehement disgust of Jews clearly demonstrates how ridiculous it is to consider him Jewish.

And if you'll recall, my very first post in this thread pointed out that Karl Marx was ethnically Jewish but that he was never raised in the Jewish religious faith. Whether he counts as "Jewish" or not depends on what you mean by "Jewish" (whether you're talking about ancestry or culture/religion).

However, the funny thing is that by Judaism's own internal rules, Karl Marx was indeed a Jew, since his mother was born Jewish.

...

If you don't understand Jewish theology, don't debate it. Apostasy is a thing in Judaism, and one of the Hebrew words for it roughly translates into English as "Destroyed One". Needless to say, it is quite possible to lose one's status as a Jew, even if one is born matrilineally Jewish. Hell, if Orthodox and Conservative Rabbis don't consider Reform Jews to be actual Jews, they sure as hell wouldn't consider an unapologetic anti-Semite to be one.

And even then, other people being racist anti-semitic shits does not excuse oneself of having such opinions, even if they are the majority. Nor does rampant pedophilia amongst Greek philosophers excuse any individual one of them from being a degenerate hedonistic craven. People are not uniquely products of their society. They have the capacity to think for themselves, and if they decide to be racists or anti-Semites or pedophiles, that is indeed a reflection of their character and reason to judge them, even if most of their contemporaries share their opinions or lifestyles.

.....................

Riiiiiiiight.

Word of advice: If time travel somehow gets invented, don't ever use it. You won't be able to get along with anyone outside your own historical period.

Pfft, if time travel somehow gets invented I'm travelling back to 44 BC, preventing Julius Caesar's assassination, and joyfully nailing Brutus to a cross before going on a campaign with Caesar to conquer the Parthians and establish an eternal Imperium Romanum.

Render unto Caesar, profligate.

[Kubra]

On the topic of Marx as an anti-semite, there is no indication that it formed any basis of his politics apart from "On the Jewish Question", an altogether obscure work (even today) by an obscure young man. In any case, it was itself not particularly vitriolic, insofar as the political conclusion of the work was abolish capitalism and jewishness (as he conceived it, of course) becomes superfluous, without any need for particular campaigns against jews themselves, as Bruno Bauer (who Marx was responding to) pushed.

On the matter of Lasaille, what we know of Marx's particular statements on him (all bad, let me assure you) is from private correspondence, not political statements among the party, the papers, or the various congress's of the IWA. Lasaille himself never doubted the characterisation of Marx as a Jew (ethnically of course), nor do I recall any examples of any other related figures doing so.

But since you brought up this apologism for Marx's views on the matter, and apparently have the innate need to demonize the Right for this same attitude being prevalent amongst their ranks in the 19th century, claiming that Marx and the Left were somehow better in this regard, I find it worth pointing out your BS. And even then, other people being racist anti-semitic shits does not excuse oneself of having such opinions, even if they are the majority. Nor does rampant pedophilia amongst Greek philosophers excuse any individual one of them from being a degenerate hedonistic craven. People are not uniquely products of their society. They have the capacity to think for themselves, and if they decide to be racists or anti-Semites or pedophiles, that is indeed a reflection of their character and reason to judge them, even if most of their contemporaries share their opinions or lifestyles.

Jesus man, even the catholic church recognizes a standing for those who died before they could hear the word of god.

In any case, let us consider this proposition: the greeks, the mongols, whatever society you prefer, let us damn them as human beings who made a conscious choice not to be moral. I wonder, did they also think to themselves "what well societies after us think of what we have done?"
Really now, are you confident in yourself that you can be fairly certain that man of 3017 will not look at you and I as some sort of unwashed savages?

[Constantinopolis]

I'm always amazed at the fact that secular liberals who do not hold a theological belief in objective morality are the quickest to label people who lived in different places and times "immoral" or "evil" because those people failed to subscribe to the moral standards of early-21st-century Western culture.

I happen to believe in absolute morality, but I also judge people by the standards of their time. For example, murder is evil, but a murderer raised in a culture where killing people is a normal part of life shouldn't be considered equivalent to a modern-day serial killer.

[Uinted Communist of Africa]

Little did anyone know, but Marx worshipped the Daedra.

that explains a lot.

[The New Sea Territory]

If you actually read the "The Opiate of the People" quote in context, he's much more lenient on religion than someone like Nietzsche or Freud.

I'm always amazed at the fact that secular liberals who do not hold a theological belief in objective morality are the quickest to label people who lived in different places and times "immoral" or "evil" because those people failed to subscribe to the moral standards of early-21st-century Western culture.

It proves Stirner's analysis of Feuerbachian secular humanism correct.

[John1565]

(Image)

Now this might sound like complete heresy but I personally think that Marx was extremely religious at one point and something happened to him which cause him to hate god (maybe a family death?) ...........

What do you guys think?

Why you think so?!!