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.
deleted by creator
Personally as an atheist who enjoys the company of our Muslim comrades, I will say that yes I understand religion to be an opiate of the masses, however, the particular dedication to the cause by those who follow the Muslim faith warrants respect, tolerance, and loyalty in return.
What atheist nutjobs are out there? There are nutjobs of almost every group, but nothing about atheism is related to nutjobbery. People like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins are nutjobs because they are imperialist crackers.
I don’t respect religion, I tolerate it. And for the most part, while I don’t believe in the neoliberal idea of agree to disagree, this is my one exception.
I will say that most muslims I’ve met or talked to are very decent people, probably way better on average than Christians.
What atheist nutjobs are out there?
R*ddit athesists
deleted by creator
People like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins are nutjobs because they are imperialist crackers.
Those are exactly the same type of people Lenin criticized as vulgar materialists. And i never even heard about Harris, but i read the primary book of Dawkins and why is he even considered “atheist”? He had some good points against religion, but what was even the point when everything he spoke about science and evolution there reads like he was just replacing traditional religion with deified science?
I don’t think he worships science, and even if that was true, science would make the most sense of anything.
Can you elaborate on vulgar materialists?
Well he don’t exactly worship science, when asked he would say he’s an atheist, but he clearly attributes some idk how to put it, metaphysics or mysticism to particularly theory of evolution. Most likely because the audience he wanted to reach would understand such comparisons, and because fucking USA brainmush about creationism, but still i never thought such comparisons are a good thing.
Vulgar materialists in broadest sense are those who don’t follow dialectical materialism. Usually it is not used for pre-marxist (more like pre-Feuerbach really) materialists like for example Diderot, they were praised by Lenin for paving the way in the same way as Ricardo and Smith in economics, and particularly praised for atheism. Today vulgar materialism would be used mostly for the liberal materialism, though as Lenin noticed way more often, those are likely cryptoidealists.
Shukran and Salam my comrade, well said
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Yeah i realize that my understanding of the term takfir was wrong - i thought you were referring to apostates not those who attack apostates. I deleted my comment but you must have seen it immediately after posting. I apologise comrade
apostate means kafir كافر, takfir تكفير is the action of labelling people as apostates. hope this helps.
it might be better to have a /c/atheism community for critical discussions of religion (I don’t think it’ll turn out like /r/atheism on R*ddit), or a broader /c/materialism, so religious people can block it if they’re not interested
/c/Materialism
Though not optimal, in the current conditions that is probably least bad way
Please do create such a thing. I’ll sub.
How would you even discuss materialism then in the first place? You know, the integral base of the philosophy of marxism. How do you want to not mention atheism around that? Because every mention is always causing shitstorm, in effect we can’t discuss atheism at all.
Even writing lenghty disclaimers about tactics and principles don’t work, every time i have to flagellate myself that i’m not Varg Vikernes.
This seems to come especially from our atheist comrades
You already banned everyone but me and some lurkers which maybe don’t want to tell anything because other than this part is a very nice space and most other communist spaces everywhere in anglo net also seems to have aggressive antiatheist moderation.
And i still remember last time where a person clearly needed some delicacy was banned and hounded off but people openly calling me, them (and Lenin) fedora reddit libs were not punished in any way. So pardon me if this post here seeming a little insincere. Maybe try that going in both ways and not alienating atheist comrades? Or maybe some more hands off, nobody is gonna eat anyone else here over this.
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.
Materialism is explicitly saying “your beliefs are based on nothing but the material conditions”. I don’t even know how you can put this in good faith, marxism is certainly pretty blunt with it.
The point of contention is not necessarily debates surrounding religion but how these are carried out. Going to a post mentioning religion and saying “Religion is bad” is something we want to avoid and it’s different from having the occasional debate. In the former case it’s an unnecessary comment.
If religious users went to posts that mention atheism and said “you should believe” everyone would also quickly grow tired of it. But so far I (personally, I emphasize that) have not seen anyone behave like this. That’s the reason I specifically mentioned our atheists, however I reiterate that the reminder goes for both religious and non-religious users.
Essentially, religious and non-religious comrades shouldn’t be harassed over it and shouldn’t have to defend themselves over their beliefs. I’m personally an atheist, and I think all of our admin team is, so it’s not like there’s a hidden agenda to start promoting religion on Lemmygrad or anything.
Regarding bans, I’d like to point out they were temp bans for people that kept being “in your face” about their dislike – sometimes hatred – of religion, sometimes after repeated warnings. At this stage it constitutes harassment but we’re very wary of banning anyone permanently. Maybe we should start, because I believe you when you say you’ve felt harassed for talking about atheism before. Please keep in mind that we’re a small team of admins, and when posts reach over 100 comments (as it usually happens when there’s a big debate), we don’t have the capacity of moderating all of it partly due to our size, and partly due to the tools Lemmy has to moderate. In that case we rely on reports.
I’m also wary of simply deleting comments because I believe people should stand behind what they say and not have it washed away by a moderator so they can get away with it if they’re being harassing. In this case I think when making a report, users should point out that they want us to delete the comment if it targets them.
The links between all of us here is that we’re all communists and MLs. I assure you religious comrades know it’s a contradiction to believe in God. But they’re not the only group to have contradictory beliefs, all of us retain some idealism in some way.
Going to a post mentioning religion and saying “Religion is bad”
There were two threads yesterday, one was specific question about religion, though you probably don’t mean this one, but the one about Hakim. I do think criticizing him for being religious is a valid point since most other answers also did praised or criticized him from the marxist point of view.
And going to post mentioning religion in a space like the “freechat” where there is no specific rule against it stated beforehand is also nothing inapropriate.
It would be inapropriate in a dedicated religious space, and also should have some guidelines like “no atheism”, not to mention that you can also critique religions broadly from not only atheist positions but from agnostic or even religious too, so “no heathens/heretics/apostates/witches/cultists etc etc”
Essentially, religious and non-religious comrades shouldn’t be harassed over it and shouldn’t have to defend themselves over their beliefs.
I seen the modlog in the meantime and the harassing comment was deleted, thank you.
I’m also wary of simply deleting comments because I believe people should stand behind what they say and not have it washed away by a moderator so they can get away with it if they’re being harassing.
Absolutely.
The links between all of us here is that we’re all communists and MLs. I assure you religious comrades know it’s a contradiction to believe in God.
Yeah i know, most “religious marxists” are actually pretty bad at either being marxist or being religious (or both), though that tend to sort itself out in time on one way or another, so i’m not too worried about it.
Also again, the entire point from my side is not shitting on religion, i don’t really need to, but to uphold the principles of marxism, because i once heard on reddit GZ, i kid you not, “you cannot be marxist if you’re not religious”, and the guy was absolutely serious and he was a mess, and it was not the only case, just the most extreme one. This moved me more than 1000 sermons from catholic hierarchs.
Anyway i did just created community about materialism, hopefully it works.
deleted by creator
It’s a bit more complicated of course, but i think i have enough walls of text for a few days at least :p
deleted by creator
I do think criticizing him for being religious is a valid point
Has he ever commented on how he reconciles Marxism with being religious? If yes then I would like to see that though I don’t mean to imply that the burden of finding it should be on you. If you have a link to it then great otherwise no worries. If he hasn’t then it is not fair to ruminate on his religious bent considering he cannot defend himself. It is not something that crucial that needs to be criticised.
I feel like he said something about religious things maybe someday being scientifically measured like dark matter.
Has he ever commented on how he reconciles Marxism with being religious?
I don’t remember seeing if he outright stated the reasons, but several people in that thread commented about it so i assumed he had somewhere, i didn’t watch all his videos really. Looking at my post there i did not criticized him for being religious, just for wrong stance on Ukraine war. In the post above yours i meant that the angle of critique is fair, not necessarily that the critique itself is correct.
If he hasn’t then it is not fair to ruminate on his religious bent considering he cannot defend himself.
Obviously the burden of proof lies on the person making the critique, but it’s pretty weird to require person having to defend themself each and every time? How would we criticize anyone already being dead then?
It is not something that crucial that needs to be criticised.
True, if he continues just as he is now, it is a very minor nitpick.
it’s pretty weird to require person having to defend themself each and every time? How would we criticize anyone already being dead then?
Well I didn’t mean it for every time but it would be good if he had the chance to do it once. Otherwise we would be talking about someone else’s beliefs with very little knowledge of them.
Publicists are mostly being known for their writings (or videos or other publication).
“If religious users went to posts that mention atheism and said “you should believe” everyone would also quickly grow tired of it. But so far I (personally, I emphasize that) have not seen anyone behave like this. That’s the reason I specifically mentioned our atheists, however I reiterate that the reminder goes for both religious and non-religious users.”
Comrades are likely understanding this space to be a Marxist one and so they are making efforts to maintain that fact. We all attack outward libs here (or we should), some attack any liberal tendencies as well. I’m not saying the latter is justified, my point is to add context.
" But they’re not the only group to have contradictory beliefs, all of us retain some idealism in some way."
Based.
What you fail to account for, comrade, is that the lemmygrad community is so powerful and unopposed in our present society that any opinion expressed here differing from my own will surely be imposed on me by force before lunch tomorrow! You’ll never take me alive! Glory to the Albanian Party of Labor!
I’ll try to chill I guess
deleted by creator
Does this mean we cannot discuss the validity of religion as a concept on lemmygrad or just to avoid belittling those who practice it? Also will this apply to religious comrades spreading their religion or only secular comrades in spreading secularism?
avoid belittling those who practice it
this one and
Also will this apply to religious comrades spreading their religion or only secular comrades in spreading secularism?
both, apologies for not being clear enough in the OP. So far I’ve never seen religious comrades proselytize and that’s why I singled out atheists later in the post. But I’ve been told some atheist users have been harassed before over it.
Alright, cool. Just making sure. Thank you for your response.
Given how I’ve seen this subject moderated thus far, discussion regarding the validity of religion, while not banned, is recommended to take place in communities dedicated to it. Furthermore, arguments regarding the validity of religion must be done in good faith, with a conscious effort to avoid sectarian arguments (which tend to achieve little actual thought in exchange for unproductive fights). While I don’t think attempts to spread religious (or lack thereof) views are allowed, publicly expressing those views tend not to be a problem, so long as they are not doing so in a manner that could be perceived as harassment, trolling, or actively hostile to those that do not share their views.
In conclusion, the discussion of religion’s validity, uses, historical context, practices, et cetera, is allowed, so long as those involved do not belittle one another for their practice (or lack thereof). Publicly expressing one’s faith, (or lack thereof) is well within guidelines, though, harassing others for not sharing them is expressly prohibited.
If I have gotten something wrong, please inform me so that I may correct my statementSo basically just continue to be respectful of our comrades and don’t attack each other for spiritual reasons as well as keeping in mind the community we are in and post we are responding to, to make sure such discussion is appropriate.
Exactly!
I think I started this in the long-run.
That said: I will lay off for now.
I do not like religion as someone that has experienced religious trauma and I have a friend that especially got it worse in a way you can’t even imagine.
That said, I will leave it at that.
I think religion is not good overall, but often times, how I express myself regarding it can seem a bit curt and leave nothing up for discussion.
That is all for now. I do not consider religion and Marxism to be, by and large, compatible in most aspects of each other. So that’s my position. But, at the same token, I know that other religions besides Christianity have been attacked in a way that is racist, overly combative, and culturally insensitive. I can understand the context behind that, given that I’ve been the target of Islamophobia, especially during my youth.
Anyway, take care, y’all.
deleted by creator
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)
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Yo! I don’t intend to invalidate your opinion of religion. But I would like to share a personal counter opinion of mine. In my 20s, I was an atheist and severely depressed. Life had no meaning, no objective, etc. And I saw that as a bad thing. After finding Buddhism, more specifically, Zen Buddhism, as described by Alan Watts, I found peace. With the knowledge that life was to be taken like a dance. Pointlessly going nowhere, but enjoying the trip. And so I’m still here. I use this as an anecdote of religion being good.
Of course, religion can be used to oppress, like anything else. Oppression using kindness as pretense exists. But I find it’s better to look at it in a case by case basis, rather than generalizing. If being religious helps you live life, then it’s good. If it doesn’t help you, then it’s bad. Those are my 2 cents on this, anyway.
Removed by mod
i mean. religion is ultimately a social control mechanism. I am not the kind of atheist that goes around “debating” people about the existence of god or whatever, but how are we supposed to accept religion? That’s such a blatant contradiction.
I would love to argue this in good faith but i just can’t see religion having a place in a modern society. I am not denying how religion contributed to advancing social causes throughout history in several instances, but unless we manage to somehow strip organized religion of its power structures and systems of belief… then i can’t see it as anything else than a reactionary force being allowed to exist
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I can be understanding on the stance of atheists since due to the corruption of Christianity and the ability of the fake Christians to exploit the ambiguity of the Biblical text to create misinterpretation for their own gain. The sacred text of other religions also seem to have ambiguity and apparent self-contradictions which allow corruption of religion or conflict over interpretation, but the interpretation problem could be resolved by finding the correct context of the text for correct interpretation. For example, the Western Europeans and Western European emigrants misinterpret, or even falsified, the Biblical texts to subordinate Yehwah to the sinful earthly desires of parasitic Caucassians and to dictate the judgement of people according to their appearance and the color of their skin. Luckily, Yehwah is selling the countries of Western Europeans and Western European diaspora to the Liberals and other religious groups just like how Yehwah hand the Jews over to the enemies of the Jews for the treason of the Jews. I would be worry about atheism and other religions taking followers from Christianity, but I know that they are taking away fake Christians and the real Christians in Western European diaspora had never decrease in number all this time.
reactionary Christians are not any more fake than any other type (if there are other types) sure the bible says “…it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” but it also says “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man she must be quiet.” there is nothing ambiguous about either, support for both side can be found in this text because it is massive and was written by a lot of people. i think it is extremely disingenuous for you to try to paint this non existent picture of real vs fake Christians. you could say there are bad and good people who happen to Christian but you certainly cant just write off this inherent problems and narratives which support oppression that exist in Christianity as if they didn’t because they are there in the same book you use to support your views.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
