The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Ep. 168
Is Communism atheist? Well, it depends on what you mean by “atheist.” Communism certainly wants belief in God out of the picture, since it believes instead in Idealized Man as his own deity, but that’s still believing in an idealized Communistic Man (which is a collective, not an individual) as a deity. It builds an entire destructive religion around this central and Luciferian evil, in fact. In this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, host James Lindsay draws from several of Marx’s writings to illustrate exactly what the relationship between Communism and atheism really is, and it’s not what most people think. Atheism is “far from” Communism, in fact, Marx tells us. Join him to understand this crucially important point about one of the most evil ideologies ever to grip the mind of man.
Subscribe to the New Discourses Podcast on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, Rumble, Odysee, or by RSS.
Additional episodes of the New Discourses Podcast are available here.
3 comments
Thanks James for a thought-provoking episode, as always. Marx’s idea of atheism as the negation of religion, leaving a ‘ploughed field’ in which another philosophy needs to ‘grow’, seems very plausible. Assuming that we don’t want communism (or fascism) to fill this gap, in your view what other non-religious philosophical system should be advocated instead? You mentioned Ayn Rand a few times in the podcast, what is your assessment of Objectivism as a candidate for this?
Human beings are inherently religious. The term “religious” itself is somewhat problematic, as it can be used narrowly to refer to a particular worship (liturgical), or used broadly to refer to a general orientation towards the transcendent (civic). Keeping this in mind, there are also zero non-religious (secular) systems that will remain secular in practice, even if it’s just quasi-religious in form.
Another issue is the coherence of a given system. Acting out incoherent systems religiously is highly problematic.. and there are zero secular philosophical systems that can stand on their own legs (coherent) since they cannot meaningfully ground intelligibility and morality without the whole thing becoming circular and arbitrary.
So I think the answer lies in non-liturgical (non-particular) religion, i.e. civic religion (universal), which isn’t really a religion at all, but a general orientation towards the Good and the Real, grounded in the transcendent (G-d).
Excellent, one of your best, James!