Yesterday, I was discussing organizational tactics with an offline comrade with boots on the ground. As a suburban yakubian, I tend to disclaim a lot of my statements with the fact that I am fundamentally disconnected from the average worker in my upbringing and lack of time to organize. However, there was a point I brought up later that we were genuinely considering as a tactic as I fervently believe it's underused in the imperial core: liberation theology and the churches as a means to agitate.

Look, I know. I know we worship supply-side Jesus in America first and foremost, and I know the religion quotes people like to bring up from prominent Marxists. I think we're misapplying them, semi-cold take.

Take the Sankara quote: "No altar, no belief, no holy book... have ever been able to reconcile the rich and the poor, the exploiter and the exploited. And if Jesus himself had to take the whip to chase them from his temple, it is indeed because that is the only language they hear.”

I've seen many use that to say that churches are not a valid vector for agitprop. I've seen it used as a thought-terminating cliche to many suggestions of liberation theology as a tactic. Which is just, not what the quote is saying at all.

Sankara is saying that we cannot reconcile class conflict through the means of religion. Material interest will almost always take precedence over piety, save for the few class traitors it might pick up along the way that do, somehow, hold belief over self-interest.

But that's not the point of using the churches as means of organization and agitation. Churches, synagogues, mosques, et al. are one of the last true robust social fabrics left standing after centuries of stratification of the working man. They are ripe for infiltration and mass agitation.

I'm sure you've seen atheist bros quote this one removed from its context: "Religion is the opium of the masses." Impressive. Very nice. Let's see the full quote.

"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 most desperate, the most beaten-down will tend to turn to piety as means of relief. Why not take advantage of this fact to agitate?

Historic revolutionaries, besides in historical moments where it was most opportune for revolutionary conditions, have frequently used nationalism and theology as organizational tactics. Many who know this take the worst message from it one can take as a citizen of the hegemon: utilizing nationalism (e.g. the PatSoc freaks).

The issue regarding this approach, is that nationalism is always viewed through the lens of a national liberation when utilized by revolutionaries. National interest, in that moment, would be liberation from its oppressors, which is why they take advantage of it. National interest in the hegemon is the continuation of this oppression. We have no nation as our masters. We are the slaver of nations. It is in our national interest to destroy and oppress all that challenges the current world order so that the 'nation' can prosper.

This is why many look to left-wing nationalism and reflectively demonize it as a tactic. The only nationalism we know as the hegemon is fascism. There is no opportunity for left-wing nationalism whatsoever in the hegemon.

Liberation theology is an entirely different means of agitation, however. It, unlike its counterpart, is detached from the geopolitic enough to be a tactic worth looking into. It's not been tried enough as far as I know in the imperial core that I have trouble pointing to examples of it. Maybe... Ireland? Though, they are only core adjacent as of recent.

America and its posse will never have a 1917, in my opinion. We've been so brain broken against the idea of socialism for socialism's sake that we have to look to different outlets to agitate. Ones that we can push the ideas of socialism before out and out giving the game away, which if so is when reaction will take hold immediately.

Even in the worst of conditions, westerners won't go to socialism wrapped in Mao and Stalin. Not to say we reject them, but you need a hook. We need to look for other vectors of agitating the message of socialism. For many of us, it was Bernie Sanders. It was the seeds of a purpose hooked on a milquetoast SocDem saying we need to be more like Denmark, and other comrades taking advantage of the collapse of that movement and false hope to agitate among the scattered vagrants.

The reason /r/chapotraphouse was so successful as a pipeline is that it wrapped the seeds of socialism in a favorite American pastime: owning the libs. Yeah, we can look back now and scoff. It was pretty lib. But the only way you tend to be able to successfully agitate socialism wrapped in Mao and Stalin in America, hell, much of the west is one-on-one, fucking lawnchair conversations over a long, long period of time.

The easiest one-on-one radicalization I've ever bagged was someone who was already hooked with me on Bernie 2020, and I simply pulled them left alongside myself. If the hook is there, the deprogramming is easier. If we can advocate and agitate the egalitarian facets of religion, and then introduce socialism, then maybe we might have an easier time agitating. And if it doesn't work? We can strike it off the list for now. There's no harm in a tactics switch up when what we have now isn't working.

I'm not saying we go full Jonestown. This cannot be taken up by 'thought leaders'. If this tactic is adopted, it must be adopted by organized, hopefully demcent parties. Be the organized communist infiltration of our sacred institutions that they fear. They fear it for a reason.

TL;DR: Turn Utah into the American Kerala. Raise an army of John Browns.