The Russian Communists Were Not Motivated By Atheism

I will allow her to refrain from arguing that religion is needed for morality since it is only a minor point to my argument. Before I begin, allow me to quote her describing her intentions: "Second, I will provide a rebuttal to Pro's arguments that dismantle his points as well as use his own arguments to detail how atheism has in fact played a role in the communist agenda. " I strongly argue that my opponent has failed to achieve her stated goal. I will detail my reasons below. She stated: "In fact, he does not know what their true motivations were at all. Using public explanations of their goals does not prove anything; politicians hardly EVER reveal their legitimate intentions or goals. " It's apparent that my opponent doesn't seem to know much about the subject since I clearly explained the Communists' motivations. The quote I provided of Lenin's was not for the masses but was written for the Communists themselves. Therefore, I argue, this statement was not simply a case of a politician telling people what they wanted to hear. In fact, the propaganda the Communists did tell people was that there was no religious persecution going on at all in their country. [1] If anyone has read about Communist ideology, it's very clear it was indeed their ideology which shaped their views about religion. They felt religion was "counterrevolutionary" and harmful because it blinded people from wanting to fight for a better place on earth (ie. socialism) and was used by the exploiters (the capitalists) in keeping the working man from seeing the reality of his exploitation: "One of the ways that the rulers used the faith was to suppress the worst profligacy and debauchery of their class, thus hiding their true vileness. The elimination of religion would remove the wool from the eyes of the oppressed and expose the rulers to the wrath they deserved. " [2] This is the same belief Lenin was trying to get across in the quote used in my opening statement. Instead of fighting for a better place on earth, the working classes were content in their lives to be exploited by the capitalists since they believed that they would be rewarded in heaven after death [hence the phrase: ". .. frees the workers from their belief in life after death by welding them together to fight in the present for a better life on Earth. "]. Another reason for the attempt at getting rid of religion, as stated briefly before, was that religion was used by the capitalists in keeping the working class subordinate. To quote Lenin on this point: "Whoever consoles a slave instead of raising him up to an uprising against slavery, helps the slaveholder. " Lenin felt that the rulers' major weapons reinforced one another: illiteracy, exhaustion, and religion. Each of these things kept the working class from gaining knowledge of something better and wanting to better their social conditions, which the Communists believed, would be achieved by removing "the wool" from their eyes, and getting the masses to rise up against the ruling class and fight for socialism. [3] Allow me to again quote Lenin regarding his motivations regarding religion: "The combating of religion cannot be confined to abstract ideological preaching. .. It must be linked up with the concrete practice of the class movement, which aims at eliminating the social roots of religion. .. It means that Social Democracy's atheist propaganda must be **subordinated to its basic task - the development of the class struggle of the exploited masses against the exploiters. **" [emphasis mine] [4] As you can clearly see, the goal of getting the people to give up religion was to "develop the class struggle of the exploited masses [the workers] against the exploiters [the capitalists]. " Even one of the very groups' slogans responsible for this "atheistic propaganda", the League of the Militant Atheists, was: "The fight for godlessness is a **fight for socialism**. " [emphasis mine] [5] The above is further evidence proving my point that it was the Marxist ideology which motivated the Communists. Everything was viewed in relationship to the class struggle. Even morality! This is something my opponent doesn't seem to understand. My opponent states further: "Saying that "[socialism] frees the workers from their belief in life after death by welding them together to fight in the present for a better life on Earth" indicates that the atheist belief in there being no life after death (with the exception of some atheists who believe in naturalistic reincarnation, but I digress) most CERTAINLY influenced Lenin's ideals! !! Therefore, the resolution has been entirely negated using Pro's own source. " Materialism is actually the belief that there is no life after death; that there is no immaterial realm. Materialism is the basis of Marxism. In fact, even Lenin wrote in 1909 that "Marxism is materialism. " [6] It must be remembered that all atheism is, is a lack of belief in god or gods and declares nothing else. This becomes very clear when you analyze it's Greek roots: "a" = without; "theos" = god. [7] It is a negative, and therefore, makes no positive assertions beyond a lack of belief in god/s. Now, most atheists do, in fact, disbelieve in life after death, but that is by no means an inherent part of atheism since it is purely a negative; it makes no positive assertions regarding anything. Therefore, logically, a person could very well have beliefs in supernatural things and still be an atheist as long as they lacked any beliefs regarding god/s. My opponent tries next to point out "holes" in my logic about citing the studies Sam Harris provided to prove that a lack of religion is not bad for a society. I agree that morality has nothing to do with infant mortality, etc. , however Harris also cited gender equality and homicide rate, which do have to do with morality. While on the same subject, Harris also shows how these countries are more charitable "both in terms of the percentage of their wealth they devote to social welfare programs and the percentage they give in aid to the developing world", [8] which also is related to morality. This was part of the argument I failed to cite. I find it odd that my opponent tries to discredit an argument by pointing out two things that were not related to morality and ignoring everything else that was said in order to claim an argument as illogical. In conclusion, my opponent's original claim, that she will "provide a rebuttal to Pro's arguments that dismantle his points as well as use his own arguments to detail how atheism has in fact played a role in the communist agenda" has been successfully and completely refuted. I have shown how each of her arguments have completely failed, from her incorrect interpretation of atheism, which has caused her to fall into error and ascribe to atheism something it does not claim to begin with, namely a lack of belief in life after death. I have also shown how Lenin's views were simply not a politician's propaganda campaign, since even the document I cited was for the Communists' very eyes and even the group responsible for the propaganda states the same motivation for the attacks upon religion: the fight for socialism. Furthermore, my opponent has failed to provide one shred of evidence that atheism was, in fact, an influence, while I have explained the goals of Marxism by using quotes of the Communists themselves and a historian on the subject. Con, therefore, has failed to even begin to refute my argument that Marxist ideology framed their true motivations; not atheism. References: 1. And God Created Lenin: Marxism vs. Religion in Russia, 1917-1929, by Paul Gabel; 325 2. Ibid. ; 79 3. Ibid. ; 79 4. Ibid. ; 90 5. Ibid. ; 326 6. Ibid. ; 73 7. The Cambridge Companion to Atheism, edited by Michael Martin; 1 8. Letter to a Christian Nation, by Sam Harris; 46