Is Islam (as revealed in the Qu'ran and described in the hadiths) compatible with Marxist thought? Can someone be a Muslim and a Marxist?
No, Islam is especially reactionary and incompatible with Marxism
No. No religion is, and Abrahamic religions especially.
Most likely not.
Last edited by Loz on 20 Apr 2012, 21:55, edited 1 time in total.
Sure. I don't see how Islam is any more or less compatible with Marxism than any religion. Though I should probably add that the hadiths might be considered as running contrary to it.
No, all religions are incompatible with Marxism
The moment one accepts the notion of 'totalitarianism', one is firmly locked within the liberal-democratic horizon. - Slavoj Žižek
No, all religions are incompatible with Marxism. If you take a look at Marx and Lenin's considerations about religion you know that there is no space for religion within Marxism, no matter what religion we are talking about.
"If I could control Hollywood, I could control the world." -Joseph Stalin
Not to say that Islam is necessarily the worst - as Loz said it's a trait shared by Abrahamic religions in general, although I think various historical movements which have led to the decline in the influence and power of the church have somewhat blunted the worst excesses of Christianity in recent history.
Though, if you were to hypothetically ask this question several hundred years ago I might well have said that Christianity was the main problem.
Judaism is highly problematic also, but because it doesn't seek to extend it's teachings to the "gentiles" it's always going to remain a very minor side-show. I honestly believe that were it not for the actions of the Nazis most people today would not even know what a Jew was. Most Jews were well on their way to assimilation (to the extent that they were allowed to by the states that they lived in) and those that weren't are largely an anachronistic sect along the lines of something like the Amish
They've all got to go though.
To this day, I'm continually surprised that there are comrades who still imagine that there is some kind of compatibility. The only way this seems to work is by having such a singular interpretation of Islam that it would not be recognizable by most other adherents.
The fact that Islam is often connected to anti-Western Imperialist movements seems to confuse some people, but they're simply not allies of Communism.
Voted Yes Completely because it is and because I have no dilemma in reconciling my faith with Marxism.
What a great argument filled with so many points.
Hi loz, I'm just here, y'know proving you wrong.
The problem with Hadith and Sunnah are the way in which they are read. Salafist interpretations run as contrary to Islam as they do to Marxism. But that's the real trick. You can use Hadith to justify anything under the sun including communism.
The main mistake most Marxists make regarding religion is that it is something that can be killed or ignored. It cannot and both are death for proletarian liberation.
Bullshit. The Abrahamic religions are the most progressive religions to ever exist. The only other reasonable contender is Buddhism and it advocates too much separation from society to be progressive.
Yeah religions can be controlled and evolve. Despite atheist rhetoric religious people aren't stupid feudal peasants waiting to be dragged back to the good ol' days. Capitalist Christianity is distinctly different from its feudal predecessor because its ruling class has different interests. But yeah proletarians could never do that.
You would have been wrong then too. The feudal aristocracy were the problem several hundred years ago. This nonsensical religion-is-the-center-of-all-ill mentality is flagrantly non-Marxist and ignores the function of religion.
The only Abrahamic religion that advocates converting Gentiles is Christianity. Islam strictly forbids treading onto Allah's territory, and the faith of others is not our concern. The idea that apostates should be killed, for example, has no basis whatsoever in the Quran.
lol that's ridiculous. It wasn't like te Germans were the only ones who wanted to kill off the Euro-Jews. The Nazis, if anything, made killing Jews unfashionable.
Nice statement right after you idea that the holocaust reinvigorated Judiasm. Why are you so compelled to ostracize people like me? Do you question my committment to communism because of my faith so thoroughly that you think I deserve to be killed off or otherwise disposed of?
So by that token anyone who reaches a Marxist position in a liberal society while others don't is wrong and using a singular interpretation of society? This post has really pissed me off. Not because it's offensive but because it's downright stupid and I know for a fact that you're a really smart dude. How do you ignore the atheist fundamentalists, like yourself, who fiercely attack any communist foolish enough to proclaim faith in God as nonmarxists or even anticommunists? Do you see how this plays into the hands of theist fundamentalists who claim communists want you to forsake your God to join them? Do you fuсking understand how God-damned frustrating it is that militant atheists parrot the rhetoric of the people you supposedly hate so much?
So what do you think happens after the revolution? You kill the religious organizations, or they just give up political manipulation? What is your plan for dealing with religion because mine makes a lot more sense and is in line with proletarian cultural hegemony unlike most atheist positions. Why is it so hard for so many Marxists to understand that Religion is just a tool like the State (which no Marxist would ever dream of leaving outside of their control)?
لَا إِلٰهَ إِلَّا الله مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ الله - يا عمال العالم اتحدوا
yes, for the most part. not so much with communism as a political movement though, but connecting it to diamat should work
I voted 'yes, for the most part', basically because of this:
Dagoth Ur wrote:
Looking back on historical relations between religion and the state, one can find many progressive or outright socialist countries where religious institutions played a positive role and walked step by step alongside the state in its attempt to transform society in the interests of ordinary people. This is true in the case of the Sandinista (which were supported by the local Catholic hierarchy despite the reactionary response from the Vatican), in various progressive Arab nationalist regimes (i.e. Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, etc.) where Islamic principles were used to justify progressive policies undertaken by the state; it was even true in the case of the mid-Stalin and post-Khrushchev era Soviet Union, where after delineating the borders between state and religious activity, Russian Orthodoxy, Islam and Judaism became not only tolerated, but even supported through subsidies to priests, help in refurbishing churches/mosques/synagogues, and allowances for travel for foreign conferences and pilgrimages to Mecca. If even the world's first socialist state eventually came around to dialog and limited support for religious institutions, I can't see why Islam, or any other denomination, is deemed incompatible with Marxism.
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
I voted yes in most part. I think that you can read it as some kind of philosophy, and Islam is quite dialectical, especially in its Shi'ite version. But as a dogma, of course, it is totally conflicting.
"Mao was just a degenerated Trotsky." Dagoth Ur
No, not at all. Some churches and religious people are 'progressive' but can't be considered marxist, their ideas amount to no more than a religion-driven social democracy/populism (at least that's the case for historical arab socialism). Historical ML states might have tried to make loyal constituents out of them, but I fail to see how that reconciles religion with Marxism (especially since these states looked for any interest group to support the ruling party or coalition of parties).
Why is that more dialectical than Sunni Islam??
Yeah I'm interested in that answer myself. Although I will say that Sunni orthodoxy as it currently stands is entirely bourgeoisie.
They took a too hands-off approach as far as I'm concerned. Not only do we have to make sure they aren't agitating for old views but that their leadership has the same proletarian interests as us. They got pretty close to accidentally doing this with Soviet Eastern Orthodoxy.
لَا إِلٰهَ إِلَّا الله مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ الله - يا عمال العالم اتحدوا
Because according to Shi'ism, you have to make the difference between the batyn, which is the covering, and the zaïr, that is to say the hidden meaning. This is quite similar to Marx's approach to ideology. Ideology is the batyn, and if you want to find truth, you must criticize it. This is one of the many features that impressed me when I was a student in Beirut.
"Mao was just a degenerated Trotsky." Dagoth Ur
Speaking of the dialectical nature of some Islamic discipline, I came across 'Kalam' from my politics teacher and it's interesting reading. Most Muslims reject this discipline because of the potential to commit heresy. Islam, especially Sunni Islam, in its current form is incompatible with Marxism because many devout Muslims reject what they deem to be the man-made laws of non-Islamic states, including socialist states, and only accept the Sharia. If we asked this question 1000 years ago, I would be more inclined to say 'Yes', if you strip away the 'religion is the opiate of the people' and concentrate on economic theories.
There are no libertarians in dumpsters.
I voted "yes, for the most part". While I do not find as much corelation between Communism and Islam, the way I do with Christianity( see Socialism and the Churches , and also Icarian Communism). However there have been numerous movements that have attempted to synthesise Marxism with Islamic thought. Such as The People's Mujahedin. This group, and various regimes, such as that of Siad Barre, have purported to be Marxist, though some have criticised them for alledgedly being too authoritarian. And conventionally, I feel that distributism would be considered by Muslim political leaders to be preferable, due to it's opposition to usury, yet support for private enterprise, based upon what I've read about Islamic teachings, by various Muslim authors. And I certainly feel that my own faith, which in Arabic is refered to as al Hanafiah, is compatible with Marxist thought. Dagoth Ur-
Quote:Isn't "dawah" comparable to the Christian concept of "witnessing"? I've always thought that it is. Though I've never experienced any Muslims trying to push their faith on me, the way I've had Christians do, in various ways, and at various times.
I feel like it's that way for a bunch of established religious authorities (It is the official doctrine of the Catholic Church for example). It's probably a demonstration of how their tacit support of private property comes in conflict with their higher moral principles.
Other: How can a religion be "conpatible" with political thought? That's like asking if Christianity is compatible with Liberalism. People with faith will find a way to reconcile it with their beliefs.
That's not an argument, because you very well know that yours is a very unorthodox Islam most Muslims would probably regard as heresy or whatever.
Sure it can.
Explain to me then why the people in Bosnia ( there are probably many other examples, but this one i'm familiar with) were forced to convert when the Ottomans conquered it in the late Middle Ages?
Because this is anti-Marxism. Workers have no need for "opium" in a socialist country.
Unorthodox Islam is still Islam. How the average Muslim practices and believes has no bearing on that.
Every attempt has proven that wrong.
The Ottomans bastardized the principles they claimed to profess. Much like your average televangelist or child-molester priest.
Alternative Display:Mobile view