this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2023
84 points (82.3% liked)

China

2031 readers
57 users here now

Discuss anything related to China.

Community Rules:

0: Taiwan, Xizang (Tibet), Xinjiang, and Hong Kong are all part of China.

1: Don't go off topic.

2: Be Comradely.

3: Don't spread misinformation or bigotry.


讨论中国的地方。

社区规则:

零、台湾、西藏、新疆、和香港都是中国的一部分。

一、不要跑题。

二、友善对待同志。

三、不要传播谣言或偏执思想。

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't you think this type of thinking is reductive? Does it not give credit to those who claim communism doesn't work because the USSR tried it? It completely ignores the specific material conditions of the time and place.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Excuse me i didn't wrote a 50 pages dissertation about that, i assumed you know this never happened anywhere where religious organizations had any significant power.

What is REALLY reductive (and also historically proven incorrect) is writing "Capitalism creates unjustifiable hierarchies that allow religion to weild immense power within our society."* and "This can be prevented under socialism, turning religion into just another part of our culture."

*EDIT: while theoretically correct, it does that, all systems of class society before did the same, so it's not sole fault of capitalism. Hell, even socialist countries didn't liquidated those hierarchies.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

My apologies if my comment came of as cententious. I think this is an interesting conversation and I'm interested in learning more and gaining insight into the different the perspectives of other comrades on the topic.

this never happened anywhere where religious organizations had any significant power.

Admitted, I'm pretty niave on the history of both of these, but what are your thoughts on this in relation to Tibet and Xinjiang? In Tibet, they banished the Dalai Lama, but not religious practice. And in Xinjiang, I believe I read there's more mosques there than anywhere else in the world. It seems education has been the key in reducing religious extremism in the region as opposed to outright banning religion.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not sure about Xinjiang exactly, but decentralised and autonomous nature of muslim religious authorities usually cause them to not have much political power when under non-muslim government, religious influence in such conditions usually results in what they did, extremist minority.

Tibet is even worse example, now its more or less cooperative, but clergy literally got deposed from power hard, expropriated nearly entirely and since then watched carefully. PRC even directly interfere with their religious hierarchy, look what they did to panchen lama and when current dalai lama dies the tibetan buddhism can very well split because it, which will increase state influence over it. And it's far from only thing.

I won't even mention what happened when Falun Gong overstepped.

outright banning religion.

You do know than beween kissing bishop ring and "outright banning religion" there is a lot of other options?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You do know than beween kissing bishop ring and "outright banning religion" there is a lot of other options?

I think this is where our discussion got off track. There's another thread in here that mentions the distinction between religious institutions and religious practice. I'm certainly in favour of placing heavy restrictions on religious institutions. I think we need to be open minded when it comes to allowing others the right to their religious practice.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I’m certainly in favour of placing heavy restrictions on religious institutions. I think we need to be open minded when it comes to allowing others the right to their religious practice.

This i agree with.