• invalidusernamelol [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      Politics and economy are a continuum. Separation of church and state in the enlightenment sense only launders the influence of religion as a tool of the state into the hands of capitalists. In Europe, when states still had state religions, abolition of state religion was important. However as seen in America that has been technically secular since 1776, that doesn't stop religion from still dominating economic and political reality.

      As the state seperated from religion, the role of support is shifted to the capitalists who, brought up in usually white christian society, use their economic influence to preserve the church as a dominant force in the social reproduction of the working class. See: prosperity and wealth gospel/mega churches.

      Separation of church and economy is basically just the prevention of the church from accumulation of capital beyond what is needed for its own subsistence. Essentially to prevent its expansion. It's allowed to continue operating freely, but loses its role as philanthropist and savior of "the wretched masses" and essentially proto-welfare state as that role is taken on by the liberated working class now master of their own destiny.

      Lenin quote:

      The thing done is to keep silent about it as if it were a piece of old-fashioned “naivete”, just as Christians, after their religion had been given the status of state religion, “forgot” the “naivete” of primitive Christianity with its democratic revolutionary spirit.

      It's important to remember that nothing exists in a vacuum, and christianity has developed alongside the capitalist state as a functionary of the capitalist state.

      Marx:

      Man emancipates himself politically from religion by banishing it from the sphere of public law to that of private law. Religion is no longer the spirit of the state, in which man behaves – although in a limited way, in a particular form, and in a particular sphere – as a species-being, in community with other men. Religion has become the spirit of civil society, of the sphere of egoism, of bellum omnium contra omnes (war of all against all/competition). It is no longer the essence of community, but the essence of difference.

      Essentially, the making of religion a private matter converts religion into a private enterprise. One subject to the same economic forces that govern capitalist production. So abolition of religion is more the ignoring of religion and removal of special privileges from it.

      • sam5673 [none/use name]
        ·
        4 years ago

        So basically the state will not act to either compel religion or forbid it and the charitable role of religion will be ended along with the need for charity, is that what you're saying.

        Christianity developed under the Roman state it adapted to both capitalism and feudalism, I'm sure it can adapt to socialism too people did after all make similar predictions about the end of religion about the transition from a feudal to a capitalist system so I'm somewhat dubious that a shift in economic systems will kill it

        • invalidusernamelol [he/him]
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          Quite possibly, but Christianity and other religions adapting to a socialist state will essentially change their nature. It will be christianity or whatever religion only in name and its practice will be indistinguishable from socialism. As the divide between the social collective and religion narrows the historical necessity of religion will disappear and anything that exists will be a vestigial appendage of the old society.

          The claim that it will wither away is that it will not have a social function anymore, it will become something akin to entertainment and not an institution with material effects on society. Like how the Roman gods still exist today, but it's Thor in the Avengers.

          Edit: In the case of Soviet oppression of Christianity, that was more a decision made by the party as a means of preventing the emergence of the church as a counter-recolutionary force either by domestic bourgeoisie or international intervention.

          You can see in China a good example of the state facilitating religion without giving it special priveleges. Also a similar form of supression occurring when the church (in this case mosque) becomes a source of counter revolutionary action.

            • invalidusernamelol [he/him]
              ·
              edit-2
              4 years ago

              Oh I know, they just had a lot of KGB agents constantly watching the church and kept a close eye on the clergy (and rightfully so).

              Kinda need to do that with something as volatile as the European Christian church. Something that millions had fought and died for over the centuries.

              Repression of the church in the USSR was more like repression of the clergy