Hi comrades,

We’ve received some reports recently and so I’m making this announcement.

In our rules, Lemmygrad does not lean one way or the other towards religion. This means that in effect, we accept all communists no matter their religion or lack thereof.

However, this doesn’t mean we allow feuds or unprincipled criticism. This seems to come especially from our atheist comrades, who sometimes (from what has made its way to us) see it fit to remind religious comrades that religion shouldn’t exist.

While we appreciate that the criticism is about religion and not the particular beliefs of some comrades, this kind of discourse does not have its place on Lemmygrad as we effectively don’t lean one way or another and expect users to lean that way too.

edit: as such, this reminder also applies to religious comrades.

We’re very hands off with moderation and we’d like it to remain that way in a community as tight-knit as ours.

This doesn’t mean that you can’t criticize religion or atheism, as long as it comes in good faith and is done from a Marxist basis.

This principle also applies to other contentious topics that are prone to debate on our platform.

  • I was reading a book by Mohamed Boudiaf (Algerian president who got assassinated) Here’s a part that might be related from 15/07/1963

    auto translate

    working class, to organize themselves, to unite for to put down the bourgeoisie in all its forms, to eliminate injustices and to promote a new society from which class differentiation, income and life chances will be banned.

    This socialism can only be based on the analysis objective reality, apart from any mystification, and reality can find its irrefutable meaning only in scientific demonstration.

    It remains nevertheless true that scientific socialism must take into account each situation to discover the best ways to a rational application, the goals remaining the same and the objectives immutable.

    To introduce the reality of our people by the only belief bias is distorting the problem. Moreover, in what way does our tolerant and just religion contradict a theory that tends to more justice, more freedom and the emancipation of man. It is time that we know that Islam (and I am a practicing Muslim) is not, cannot be a brake on progress or an alibi for those who want to preserve their privileged situation.

    We must define ourselves politically, take a definitive option and commit to a path instead of wandering around looking for socialisms different from the only one that has proven itself. By remaining believers, who forbids us to fight for our society to be completely liberated, to be built up in the interest of all, and that everyone has the right to life, to work, to freedom and to a better well-being? Those who maintain that the Muslim religion opposes these noble goals, are not Muslims or are followers of a particular Islam, let’s say specific, which I personally deny.

    I just find it interesting.

    • SovereignState
      link
      101 year ago

      Thank you for sharing, quite fascinating, reconciling scientific socialism with Islam. I think it was a practice for some major Ba’athists too, right? Like “I’m Muslim, but any sect that finds itself tryna preserve exploitation even in the name of Allah boutta be excommunicated”.

      In those exact words ofc. (/s)

      • “I’m Muslim, but any sect that finds itself tryna preserve exploitation even in the name of Allah boutta be excommunicated”.

        Which is ironic, because after his death Algeria saw 20 years of those.

        About ba’athism, I am not really educated on it.