this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
71 points (100.0% liked)

askchapo

22694 readers
407 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try [email protected] if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 19 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If Lenin killed every priest, Russia wouldn’t be homophobic, because Lenin’s original intent would have been enforced at gunpoint long enough for a new generation to grow up under it.

You don’t get rid of religion by killing priests, or religious prejudice by outlawing religion. Religious prejudice is a product of oppression by nature and by exploitation. Marx called state repression of religion nonsense because it’s really no different than killing all criminals and expecting crime to go away. When state power is seized, the religious establishment should lose its hold on the state, anything else will be eradicated through development.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

How much development? The USSR developed more and more rapidly than anyone else and as soon the opportunity arose all the old vices came back (if they can be said to have truly gone away).

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

More than was made. It’s not realistic to expect religion to be eliminated in less than a century; even with speedy development, the USSR was backward for most of its lifetime.

The “old vices” grew again heavily because exploitation, inequality, and class divisions reappeared, as well as the government allowing religion to gain institutional footholds as it lost its character as a dotp. As for why it ceased to be a dotp, unequal development across various areas as a result of leaps in modes of production/premature centralization caused different classes to assert themselves in the party.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

That’s a fair interpretation. The thing that didn’t work was simply incomplete cannot be disproved as as an argument.