[Marxism] Atheism is foundational to Marxism

David McDonald dbmcdonald at comcast.net
Fri Dec 8 19:04:28 MST 2006

David Walters:

it's something I haven't thought too much about, but I
knew 'believers' in the SWP, who generally kept a low profile but people
really challenged them who didn't agree. I have no problem with this myself.
remember hearing from leaders of the SWP that "we are atheistic
but not programmatically". You could, technically, believe in a god and be
the SWP. My question, then, given that that the decision to allow believers
into the CCP is a relatively new one, their previous position was NOT to
them in, do you think that was a mistake? If so, back then, did you put
your own position on this during your free exchange of ideas with members of
CP and other Cubans when you sat around discussing things? I'm trying to
out if your positions is decided by the CCP's own position on this or that
have have genuinely thought about this without prompting from Gramna? I
this is a fair question.

David McDonald:

Truly stupid and gratuitously malevolent besides. When Walter came to the
position can have nothing to do with its correctness, can it? Then it must
just be a dig, isn't it? And what, please, is the point of taking up
bandwidth to deliver these witless digs except to display whiteboy coolness?

Personally, I have thought a lot about this question. The currect CCP
position is one I endorse because unity is the issue, and non-issues must be
ruthlessly pushed aside. I will admit to the sin of thinking seriously about
something because the commander in Chief of the Revolutionary Armed Forces
of Cuba brought it up. If someone is willing to join the Communist Party of
Cuba, or ANY communist party anywhere, or any reasonably decent party
anywhere, what precisely is the point of bringing religion into the
conversation? Answer: to display erudition, coolness, Marxivity. I say: fuck

I listened to Dawkins in detail and have read his book. It is garbage and
his argument is garbage. I say this being a great fan of Dawkins in general.

His fundamental argument for atheism and the importance of writing about it
now is that religous ideas, not being testable, can lead to fanaticism
because the views of the religious about religous questions cannot be
refuted, unlike those of science. As I said, garbage. Did testability lead
the creators of the atomic bomb, scientists one and all, to refuse to build
it on the grounds, manifestly predictable, that it would be used on human
beings to make a point? How about all the other bombs they've invented,
those scientists? Did testability stop the development of a single one of
them? Nope. The sad fact it, that the majority of scientists working today
spend their days making bombs, airplanes and communications devices that
have no other use than to deliver bombs and other WMDs. And these are the
hope of humanity acccording to Dawkins. Talk about an ivory tower existence.
There is also a certain stench of anti-Arabism in his work that puts me off.
Scientists are doing everything they can to ruin the world because that's
what they are PAID to do and they do it willingly.

More information about the Marxism mailing list