Xi Wuyi: Socialists are Practical Atheists
"Socialists are practical atheists"—this proposition originates from the writings of Engels. He wrote: "Among the socialists there are also theorists, or, as the communists call them, outright atheists, whereas the socialists are called practical atheists." [1]
I believe that in the current theoretical construction of Marxist religious studies, the proposition that "socialists are practical atheists" is one full of vitality. Practicality is one of the most famous characteristics of Marxist philosophy. In the history of human thought, the famous quote by Marx that historians collectively focus upon is: "Philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it." The history of contemporary China's reform and opening up has also proved that practice is the only way for the Sinicization of Marxism.
Regarding atheism and the view of religion, Marx and Engels did not write systematic monographs. However, while establishing the Marxist system of thought, they produced many incisive discourses on religious issues. At present, some scholars who claim to study the Marxist view of religion never mention atheism. In fact, in his mature period, Marx was a staunch atheist. This conclusion has long been a basic consensus in both Chinese and foreign academic circles. Marxist atheism permeates many works in philosophy, political economy, and history, coexisting with his overall thought as an integral whole. As the Western scholar Denys Turner pointed out, the essence of Marx’s atheism and view of religion is not limited to the texts in which he directly addresses religious issues: "All his most important statements are made in the course of his frequent challenges to religion as a revolutionary socialist."
In today's world, faced with complex and diverse religious phenomena, Marxist atheism is our powerful ideological weapon. It is the historical mission of our generation of scholars to develop new connotations for it within socialist practice as the times evolve, and to establish a Sinicized disciplinary system for scientific atheism.
I. The Critique of Religion and the Founding of Historical Materialism
The worldview of Marx and Engels underwent a complex process of shifting from idealism to materialism, and subsequently founding historical materialism. It was precisely through the critique of religion that they embarked on the path of historical materialism. In the early theoretical research of Marx and Engels, the exploration of the essence, origins, and social functions of religion became an important growth point in the formation of historical materialism. Their critique of religion was synchronized with the founding of historical materialism; the two complemented each other and were inseparable.
Why did Marx and Engels focus on religious issues in their early theoretical research? From the perspective of the social environment, Christianity was the spiritual pillar maintaining the German social system at that time. From the perspective of personal factors, they were both born into families with traditional religious beliefs and were themselves religious believers in their early years. It was starting from the critique of religion that they embarked on the path of independent thinking. Marx’s doctoral dissertation was titled The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature, in which he extensively studied various schools of ancient Greek philosophy, with the most in-depth study being on Epicurus. The contemporary scholar David McLellan pointed out that two factors drew Marx's attention to Epicurus in his dissertation: first, the emphasis on the autonomy of the human spirit, liberating humanity from the superstitions of transcendent objects; and second, the emphasis on the "self-consciousness of the free individual." For Marx, the critique of religion was an important path to realizing self-consciousness.
Marx called Epicurus "the greatest Greek enlightener" and the "philosopher of self-consciousness." Later, in The German Ideology, co-authored with Engels, he praised Epicurus as "the true radical enlightener of antiquity who openly attacked the ancient religion. If the Romans had any atheism, it was founded by Epicurus." In his later years, in the article "Bruno Bauer and Early Christianity," Engels spoke highly of Epicurus, noting that "the final form of Greek classical philosophy (especially the Epicurean school) developed into atheistic materialism, while the vulgar philosophy of the Greeks developed into monotheism and the doctrine of the immortality of the soul." The enlightening wisdom in classical Greek philosophy became one of the ideological resources for Marxist atheism.
With the development of practical activities and theoretical understanding, Marx moved from the critique of religion toward the critique of real-world suffering. In 1844, Marx’s "Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right" (hereafter referred to as the "Introduction") was published in the Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher. This was a landmark work marking Marx’s transition from idealism to materialism. Some scholars now suggest that the "Introduction" is not the cornerstone of the Marxist view of religion; they contrast Marx’s critique of religion with his critiques of politics and economics, arguing that the view that "the critique of religion is the prerequisite of all other critiques" is an idealistic viewpoint. In today's academic circles, the "universal values" of religion have become a catchphrase for many well-known scholars, and "the critique of religion" has become a rare voice. I believe it is highly necessary to reread Marx’s critique of religion.
The first sentence of Marx’s "Introduction" is: "For Germany, the critique of religion has been essentially completed, and the critique of religion is the prerequisite of all other critiques." Why was the critique of religion so important in Germany?
In the early 19th century, while British and French capitalism was flourishing, Germany was still under the rule of the Prussian feudal dynasty. Christianity was the ideology of the German feudal princes at the time and a spiritual shackle hindering social development. Under the autocratic rule of the Prussian feudal dynasty, "politics was then a field overgrown with thorns." Consequently, "the main struggle turned into an anti-religious struggle." The theoretical research of the young Marx and Engels began with the critique of religion. The enlightenment thought of the Young Hegelians, especially Feuerbach’s humanistic view of religion, stripped away the sacred halo of religion with the sharp pen of atheism. Therefore, Marx said: "For Germany, the critique of religion has been essentially completed."
As Richard Rosen has pointed out, after Marx moved from the critique of religion to the critiques of politics and economics, the proposition that "the critique of religion is the prerequisite of all other critiques" remained valid. Marx explained:
"The proof of the radicalism of German theory, and thus of its practical energy, lies in its taking as its point of departure a resolute positive abolition of religion. The critique of religion ends with the teaching that man is the highest essence for man—hence, with the categorical imperative to overthrow all relations in which man is a debased, enslaved, abandoned, despicable essence."
Marx’s "critique of religious alienation" was the starting point for his political and economic critiques. As can be seen from the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 (hereafter referred to as the "Manuscripts"), Marx analyzed the structure of other forms of alienation through religious alienation. Concern for real-world suffering became the beacon for the continuous deepening of his critical philosophy. Marx said: "The critique of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the critique of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo." The issue of real suffering became the central concept linking the critique of religion with other critiques.
Marx pointed out in the "Introduction":
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness." "The task of history, therefore, once the other-world of truth has vanished, is to establish the truth of this world. It is the immediate task of philosophy, which is in the service of history, to unmask self-estrangement in its unholy forms once the holy form of human self-estrangement has been unmasked. Thus the critique of heaven turns into the critique of earth, the critique of religion into the critique of law, and the critique of theology into the critique of politics." Marx emphasized that after abolishing the truth of the "beyond"—that is, religious fantasy—the task of history is to establish the truth of the "here and now"—that is, the truth of the real world. Marx’s critique of religion shifted to a critique of politics; that is, only by overthrowing the existing irrational system can social suffering be eliminated.
From 1845 to 1846, Marx and Engels co-authored The German Ideology (hereafter referred to as Ideology). The most important contribution of this famous work was the founding of the historical materialist conception of history. They pointed out:
"This conception of history relies on expounding the real process of production, starting from the material production of life itself, and comprehending the form of intercourse connected with this and created by this mode of production (i.e., civil society in its various stages), as the basis of all history; and then, in its action as the state, to explain all the different theoretical products and forms of consciousness, religion, philosophy, ethics, etc. etc. and trace their origins and growth from that basis; by which means, of course, the whole thing can be depicted in its totality (and therefore, too, the reciprocal action of these various sides on one another). It has not, like the idealistic view of history, in every period to look for a category, but remains constantly on the real ground of history; it does not explain practice from the idea but explains the formation of ideas from material practice."
For the first time, Marx and Engels introduced the viewpoint of practice into epistemology and elaborated on the basic principles of the materialist conception of history. In terms of social science methodology, the founding of the materialist conception of history was an epoch-making transformation. Marx pointed out that historical materialism was the result of his combining the critique of religion with the critique of politics, and philosophical research with economic research. Once this result was achieved, it was "used as a leading thread in my studies." Engels pointed out that historical materialism is the science of real people and historical development. Like the materialist dialectic, once it emerged, it "became our best working tool and our sharpest weapon."
Examining social religious phenomena from the perspective of the materialist conception of history, Marx pointed out in Ideology:
"Religion has neither essence nor kingdom of its own... If he [Feuerbach] really wants to speak of the 'essence' of religion, i.e., of the material basis of this figment of the imagination, then he should seek it neither in the 'essence of man,' nor in the predicates of God, but only in the existing material world of each developmental stage of religion."
In the history of human thought, Marx and Engels were the first to scientifically reveal the relationship between religion and its real social foundation. According to the principles of historical materialism, religion, as a social ideology, is a reflection of social existence. To study the essence and laws of development of religion, one should examine the material basis composed of the productive forces and relations of production at every stage of human social development, and examine the social structures and ideologies determined by the development of the productive forces.
Therefore, the Marxist view of religion is the historical materialist view of religion.
II. Scientific Atheism is the Philosophical Foundation of the Historical Materialist View of Religion
Just as "theism" is the philosophical foundation of the idealistic view of religion, "scientific atheism" is the philosophical foundation of the historical materialist view of religion.
Atheism is an ideological system in opposition to theism; the two are mutually generative and mutually restrictive, possessing a long historical lineage. "Atheism is the doctrine or belief that there is no god or gods. This term first appeared in the works of Plato." Since the Renaissance in the 15th century, stars have shone brightly within the movement of Enlightenment. Thinkers critiquing religion emerged in succession, launching a courageous challenge against religion's core concept—the sovereignty of God over man. Representative figures among them include Voltaire’s deism, Diderot’s rational skepticism, Hume’s agnostic empiricism, and Feuerbach’s materialist atheism, among others. The development of modern natural science and the Enlightenment trends in the humanities became the social foundation and intellectual source of Marxist atheism.
Marxist atheism is called scientific atheism. This is because this thorough atheism is established upon the foundation of the historical materialist worldview. If the thinkers of the modern Western Enlightenment shook the cosmology, epistemology, and value systems of traditional religion, then Marxist atheism shook the entire theoretical foundation of religious theology.
(1) The Origins and Nature of Religion
Scientific atheism studies religious issues and various theistic worldviews, epistemologies, and methodologies from the category of philosophy.
In the Introduction [6], Marx provided a profound exposition on the origin, nature, and function of religion. He parsed the thoughts of Luther’s Reformation, the Enlightenment, Hegel, and Feuerbach, conducting a comprehensive discourse on religious issues:
"The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion. Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."
I believe that Marx’s aforementioned discourse contains at least three layers of meaning:
First, it reveals the material source of religious phenomena. Marx pointed out: "Man makes religion, religion does not make man." Targeting the limitations of Feuerbach’s critique of religion—namely, that he merely reduced the essence of religion to the essence of man, and understood man merely as an abstract man—Marx pointed out: "Man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion." Therefore, religion is a product of the social base of its era.
Second, it reveals the nature of religion. Marx believed that religion is the self-consciousness and self-feeling of man who is heavily oppressed by alien forces; it is a reflection of the illusory inversion of the real world. Later, Engels further pointed out: "All religion, however, is nothing but the fantastic reflection in men’s minds of those external forces which control their daily life, a reflection in which the terrestrial forces assume the form of supernatural forces." From the perspective of worldview, Marx and Engels revealed the content of religious fantasy, showing that religious ideology is the "popular logic" of the real world. They elucidated the nature of religion from the perspectives of the subject and object of cognition.
Third, it reveals the social function of religion. Marx noted: "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature... it is the opium of the people." Marx believed that the social function of religion at that time was "consolation and justification," which dissipated the critique of the actual system. It helped maintain the existing social order while also soothing the "oppressed creature."
(2) The Critique of Religious Ideology and Social Revolution
While Marx and Engels were co-authoring The German Ideology (hereafter Ideology), Marx also drafted his research notes, the Theses on Feuerbach (hereafter Theses). In Ideology and the Theses, they critiqued and transcended Feuerbach’s view of religion.
Marx critiqued Feuerbach’s understanding of the human essence, emphasizing that the human essence lies in its sociality. The starting point of Feuerbach’s view of religion was "abstract man"—that is, explaining man through biology and physiology. Conversely, the starting point of the Marxist view of religion is "real man." He said: "Feuerbach resolves the essence of religion into the essence of man. But the essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality it is the ensemble of the social relations."
Marx expanded Feuerbach’s critique of religion—that "religion is the alienation of the human essence"—into the results of two types of "alienation." One is the self-alienation of the human essence into an external "sacred image," namely illusory concepts such as God, the Kingdom of Heaven, and salvation. The other is the self-alienation of the human essence into a "non-sacred image," namely the material and social environment in which man lives—specifically, the irrational system of exploitation. The Enlightenment thought of Feuerbach only revealed the first type of alienation, whereas Marx not only elucidated the connotations of both but also argued that the second type of alienation is the foundation of the first. To eliminate the alienation of the human essence by religion, one must transform the social system and economic base upon which it relies.
Marx pointed out in the Manuscripts [7]:
"Religion, family, state, law, morality, science, art, etc., are only particular modes of production, and fall under its general law. The positive transcendence of private property as the appropriation of human life, is therefore the positive transcendence of all alienation—that is to say, the return of man from religion, family, state, etc., to his human, i.e., social, existence. Religious alienation as such occurs only in the realm of consciousness, of man’s inner life, but economic alienation is that of real life; its transcendence therefore embraces both aspects. It goes without saying that the movement among different peoples goes through different phases according to whether the real established life of the people manifests itself more in consciousness or in the external world—is more ideal or real."
Marx believed that "religious alienation is the alienation of real life." The alienation of real life—namely the private ownership of the means of production that generates exploitation and oppression—is the foundation for the alienation of the superstructure, including religion. Only through the "positive transcendence of private property" can the alienation of man by religion return to the human essence. As a social revolutionary, Marx differed from other Enlightenment thinkers; he did not discuss the psychological and historical origins of religion in the abstract, but rather faced the social reality, analyzing the functions and social roots of religion from the perspective of the relations of production and the social system. The edge of Marx’s critique was directed straight at the irrational society that produced religious phenomena.
Why did Marx critique religion as an ideology? This was a continuation and development of the modern Western Enlightenment thinkers. In Medieval Europe, the Roman Catholic Church implemented a feudal autocracy characterizing the unity of church and state, which suppressed the vitality of social and economic development and devastated people's free and innovative thought; this was known as the "Dark Ages." Subsequently, Europe underwent capitalist movements such as the Renaissance, the Reformation, the French Revolution, and the British Industrial Revolution, and the problem of the ideologization of religion received a massive shock. However, the legacy of religious ideologization was still inherited by the bourgeois state. If Enlightenment thinkers did not critique religion from the perspective of ideology and did not touch the fundamental social system, religion would "borrow a corpse to resurrect the soul" [8] in the form of a new ideology, continuing to obstruct the comprehensive liberation of humanity itself. Marx continued to critique religion from the aspect of ideology with the goal of destroying the alliance between the bourgeois state and Christianity, proposing a program for social transformation and establishing a new social system.
When I re-read Marx’s critique of religion from the perspective of ideology, I still feel that the power of truth can penetrate history. History progresses through twists and turns. The contemporary revival of religious neo-fundamentalism and its expansion into the political sphere has once again made the question of whether modern states can adhere to the principle of the separation of church and state a focus of attention. Since the 1970s, the revival of Christian neo-fundamentalism in the United States, allied with political conservatism, has attempted to use the power of the state to spread the Christian Gospel globally, creating a new crisis for the separation of church and state. The "International Religious Freedom Act of 1998" passed by the U.S. Congress is a landmark event of U.S. religious forces influencing national foreign policy. Since the end of the Cold War, the core discourse of Western powers has shifted toward human rights "founded upon religious freedom." The "universal values" of Christianity are constantly being abstracted, becoming a totem for Western-style democratic systems. These symbolic "universal values" attempt to strip the core socialist value system away from the basic social relations of various countries, becoming a weapon of "neo-interventionism" on the international stage. This tendency toward the ideologization of religion has affected the development of cultural diversity in the international community and caused global instability.
(3) Atheism and Communism
Since Ideology and the Theses were not publicly published during Marx and Engels’ lifetimes, the sign of the public emergence of their scientific worldview was The Communist Manifesto (hereafter the Manifesto). In 1848, Marx and Engels jointly published the Manifesto, making the basic ideas of Marxism public for the first time. It also marked the public debut of historical materialism and scientific atheism. Using historical materialism and materialist dialectics as their worldview, they proposed a theory of realizing a new communist society by means of social revolution, overthrowing the existing system of exploitation and eliminating the final roots of all phenomena of alienation.
The atheism expounded by Marx has an important characteristic: atheism is linked with the cause of communism. Marx believed that communism is, from the outset, atheistic. While accepting communism, Engels gradually turned toward atheism. Marx argued in the Manuscripts:
"Atheism and communism are no flight from, no abstraction from, the world of things created by man... On the contrary, they are but the first real emergence, the realization become real for man, of his essence as something real."
Marx believed that atheism and communism are the true realization of the human essence. Atheism transcends God and is the emergence of theoretical humanism; communism transcends private property and is the emergence of practical humanism. The "humanistic society" envisioned by Marx had two elements: the spiritual world is atheistic, and the social foundation is the communist system. Atheism and communism together constitute the beautiful future society of humanity.
Regarding the historical value of atheism, Marx believed:
"Atheism, as the denial of this unreality [religion], has no longer any meaning, for atheism is a negation of God, and postulates the existence of man through this negation; but socialism as socialism no longer stands in any need of such a mediation." [9]
In the embryonic stage of human society, there were no gods and no religion. With the development of human society, the concept of spirits gradually emerged and religious organizations appeared; this was a way of life in the development of human civilization. "Atheism is humanism mediated with itself through the supersession of religion," and "this mediation is a necessary precondition." In the transcendence of religion, atheism produces a positive humanism. I believe Marx’s discourse can be understood to mean that in the long history of human development, religion, as a mediation to be transcended, will exist alongside the growth of atheism.
Regarding communism and atheism, Marx believed:
Communism begins directly with atheism (Owen [20]), whereas atheism initially was not communism at all; that atheism remained fundamentally an abstraction. Therefore, the philanthropy of atheism is initially only a philosophical, abstract philanthropy, while the philanthropy of communism is directly real and immediately seeks practical results.
Marx believed that the philanthropy of atheism was initially abstract and philosophical, while the philanthropy of communism is "real" and "seeks practical results." Atheism is a philosophical concept, whereas communism is a social system. Philosophical concepts can only provide abstract philanthropy; only the social foundation of communism can provide real philanthropy to human society.
Is the superstructure of a communist society "atheistic philanthropy"? From a philosophical category standpoint, atheism and theism are a unity of opposites that depend on each other for existence. In 1884, Engels wrote in a letter to Bernstein: "Atheism, being merely a negation of religion and constantly referring to religion, has no existence of its own without it." I believe that from the perspective of philosophical logic, the analysis of the historical role of atheism by the late Engels is more persuasive than the discourse of the early Marx. The philosophical mission of atheism is to critique the illusions of religious theology, establish a scientific outlook on life and values, and promote the development of human society. As an abstract philosophical category, it will exit the stage of history alongside the withering away of religion.
III. Socialists are Practical Atheists
Marx and Engels pointed out that socialist society is the inevitable path toward communist society. However, during their lifetimes, they were unable to personally participate in the practice of socialism. Their discourse on socialist society could only remain at the stage of theoretical speculation. Lenin led the October Revolution in Russia and established the first socialist state. In the practice of participating in socialist construction, he developed Marxism, including Marxist atheism.
The birth of a Soviet socialist state transformed scientific socialism from theory into reality. It broke through Marx's hypothesis that socialism could only occur and triumph simultaneously in developed capitalist countries. Socialism first achieved victory in Russia—a relatively backward country at the time. Lenin said: "We have now reached a historical turning point where theory is being transformed into practice, vitalized by practice, corrected by practice, and tested by practice." Turning Marxist theory (including religious theory) into practice, using Marxist theory to guide practice, and creatively developing Marxist theory through practice—these are the main characteristics of Lenin's socialist religious theory.
Regarding the issue of socialism and religion, the Soviet socialist state faced an extremely severe situation. Before the 1905 Revolution, Russia was a typical autocratic state characterized by the union of church and state. The Tsarist government and the Orthodox Church jointly controlled various social, political, economic, and cultural resources. At the beginning of the 20th century, 95% of the Russian population were Orthodox believers. During the 1905 Revolution, the Church became an effective accomplice of the Tsarist autocracy, openly calling on Orthodox believers to die for the Tsar. After the 1905 Revolution, the Orthodox Church still possessed powerful influence and became an important social force opposing the socialist revolution. Lenin believed that clericalism was one of the most dangerous political enemies in Russia at that time. After the October Revolution, the new government issued decrees stripping the Church of its political and economic privileges to establish the socialist system. At that time, nearly the entire religious community participated in counter-revolutionary activities against the Soviet regime.
Therefore, fighting resolutely against the Orthodox Church, exposing the political function of religion in maintaining the autocratic system, and awakening the people from the religious mist became important tasks for the Bolshevik Party. In the 19th century, Marx said that "for Germany, the critique of religion has been essentially completed," but in early 20th-century Russia, the ideological enlightenment movement that the bourgeoisie had failed to carry out had to be undertaken by the Bolshevik Party. Lenin's view of religion had a strong ideological color. On one hand, from the perspective of political struggle, he studied and attacked religion using the method of class analysis, emphasizing that religion is the opium of the people; on the other hand, from the perspective of ideological enlightenment, he emphasized that Marxists must "form an alliance with modern natural scientists" and that "socialism enlists science to dispel the religious mist and unite the workers for a real struggle for a better life on earth, thereby liberating them from superstition regarding life after death."
Facing the severe and complex situation of religious struggle, Lenin wrote important documents such as Socialism and Religion, The Attitude of the Workers' Party to Religion, and On the Significance of Militant Materialism. At that time, he creatively proposed the religious theory and policy for Communists in Soviet socialism. Examining from the perspective of social practice, I believe there are three important contents in Lenin's atheism and view of religion that deserve special attention:
First, the religious policy of a socialist state: separation of church and state, and freedom of religious belief for citizens. Lenin argued:
Religion must be declared a private matter. In these words, the attitude of socialists toward religion is usually expressed. ... The state should not concern itself with religion, and religious societies should have no connection with state authority. Everyone must be absolutely free to profess any religion he pleases, or no religion whatever, i.e., to be an atheist, which every socialist usually is. ... All mention of a citizen’s particular religion in official documents should be eliminated without exception. No subsidies should be granted to the established church nor state allowances made to church and religious societies. These should become wholly free associations of like-minded citizens, associations independent of the state.
Emerging from the Middle Ages, the separation of church and state and the freedom of religious belief for citizens became basic principles of modern state-building. To break the old system of the union of church and state, Lenin emphasized the thorough implementation of the principle of separation of church and state in Soviet state-building to prohibit the state from forcing people to believe in religion. Lenin further proposed that religious groups in a socialist society should become "wholly free associations of like-minded citizens, independent of the state." This discourse has attracted special attention from contemporary Chinese scholars of religious studies. Some scholars believe that in promoting the construction of religion and the rule of law, Lenin's discourse on "associations of citizens" is an important intellectual resource.
Second, the proletarian party must adhere to and propagate atheism. Lenin pointed out:
Our Program is based entirely on a scientific, and moreover the materialist, world-outlook. An explanation of our Program, therefore, necessarily includes an explanation of the true historical and economic roots of the religious mist. Our propaganda necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism.
The proletarian party demands that the state should declare religion a private matter, but it does not for a moment regard the question of the fight against the opium of the people, the fight against religious superstitions, etc., as a "private matter."
"Our Party is an association of class-conscious, advanced fighters for the emancipation of the working class. Such an association cannot and must not be indifferent to lack of class-consciousness, ignorance or obscurantism in the shape of religious beliefs. We demand complete disestablishment of the Church so as to be able to combat the religious mist with purely ideological weapons, with our press and our oral persuasion. One of the reasons why we founded our organization, the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, is precisely to wage such a struggle against any religious bamboozling of the workers. To us, the ideological struggle is not a private affair, but the affair of the whole Party, of the whole proletariat."
Lenin's discourse clearly shows that the Marxist party is the vanguard of the proletariat. Its Party Program is built on the foundation of a scientific materialist world-outlook. The propaganda of atheism is part of the Party’s work. The Marxist party demands the separation of church and state in order to separate religious issues from political power, so as to use ideological weapons to combat religious superstition. If religion were also a private matter for Communists, it would fundamentally change the nature of the Party.
The Communist Party of China has inherited and developed this important thought. Comrade Jiang Zemin [21] pointed out: "Communists are atheists, and the world-outlook of Communists should be the Marxist world-outlook. Communists not only cannot believe in religion, but also must propagate atheism and a scientific world-outlook to the masses." Comrade Chen Kuiyuan [22] has repeatedly reaffirmed: "Communist Party members must respect the masses' freedom of belief, but Party members must be atheists; they should not worship gods or Buddhas. Only those who adhere to the Party’s faith are qualified to be members." These ringing voices of justice are full of combativeness.
Currently, in the field of religious studies, many studies claiming to be Marxist religious theory reject atheism, making the study of atheism almost a "lost art." Furthermore, a certain professor from the National Academy of Governance wrote a long treatise arguing for the rationality of allowing Communist Party members to believe in religion, suggesting that "if there are believers of different religions within the Communist Party, it is not only harmless but beneficial to improving the CPC's governing capability." This professor believes: "If we continue to adopt a rigid mode of thinking and cling to a monolithic atheistic theory within the Party, it will inevitably conflict seriously with the current nature, guiding ideology, and historical tasks of the Party, ultimately endangering the Party’s own governing status." Facing such bizarre and erroneous arguments, many scholars view them with a detached mind, reflecting the tolerance and cultural pluralism of current society. However, when the voice stating that "Party members must be atheists" becomes a rare sound in the field of religious studies, should it not serve as a wake-up call?
Third, the handling of religious issues must always be subordinate to the general tasks of the proletarian revolution.
Lenin said, why must the religious struggle "be subordinated to the class struggle, i.e., the struggle for definite, practical aims in the economic and political spheres?" This is because, according to the Marxist view of religion, the oppression of humanity by religion is a product and reflection of socio-economic oppression. "The unity of this real revolutionary struggle of the oppressed class for the creation of a paradise on earth is more important to us than unity of proletarian opinion on paradise in heaven." That is to say, the religious struggle cannot be placed above the political struggle; it must be subordinate to the general tasks of the Russian socialist revolution.
Lenin proposed that socialists are historical materialists and must be skilled in struggling against religion. He said:
We must combat religion—that is the ABC of all materialism, and consequently of Marxism. But Marxism is not a materialism which has stopped at the ABC. Marxism goes further. It says: We must know how to combat religion, and in order to do so we must explain the source of faith and religion among the masses in a materialist way. The combatting of religion should not be confined to abstract ideological preaching, and it should not be reduced to such preaching. It should be linked up with the concrete practice of the class movement, which aims at eliminating the social roots of religion.
The practical problem facing Russia at that time was: "Why does religion retain its hold on the backward sections of the town proletariat, on broad sections of the semi-proletariat, and on the mass of the peasantry?" This is a question concerning the Party's mass line. Lenin pointed out that on the issue of religion, the Marxist party must never act like bourgeois materialists shouting: "Down with religion, long live atheism!" This seemingly revolutionary view is actually "a superficial, bourgeois limited culturalist view." He gave an example: in a workers' strike, workers cannot be divided into atheists and Christians. If differences in religious belief are emphasized during the struggle and atheistic propaganda is conducted aggressively, it is superfluous and harmful. This is because it would hurt the feelings of the religious masses, deepen the division among the masses on religious issues, and create religious hatred within the oppressed classes, potentially turning the Russian socialist revolution into a chaotic brawl between believers of different religions and atheists. Therefore, Lenin reminded the whole Party many times that "special caution is required" regarding religious issues. Treating the masses' religious beliefs requires strict mastery of religious policies; this concerns the vitality of the Party.
Since the end of the Cold War, the historical heavy responsibility of adhering to the socialist direction and holding high the banner of Marxism has fallen onto the shoulders of the Chinese Communists. In the practice of socialism, developing the Marxist view of religion is also one of the missions of the Chinese Communists.
Distinct from the cultural traditions of Western societies, the Chinese nation has possessed a rich current of humanistic thought and a pluralistic, inclusive approach to religious belief throughout its thousands of years of historical development. Political power has always dominated ecclesiastical power; religion could only submit to the rule of secular political authority and never became an independent socio-political force, existing in society primarily as a cultural mode. Consequently, during China’s New Democratic Revolution and socialist construction, the religious question has never been a primary social problem. Facing China’s concrete realities, Chinese communists incorporated the religious question into the framework of the United Front [13] and appropriately resolved religious issues within the cause of the revolution.
Currently, our country is in the primary stage of socialism, where the relations of production are characterized by a pattern in which public ownership is the mainstay and multiple forms of ownership coexist. This economic base determines the existence of diverse ideologies and cultures. Various religious cultures are also important factors constituting this ideological and cultural diversity. Given that the ruling party adheres ideologically to historical materialism and dialectical materialism—and insists upon scientific atheism—how to face various religious cultures centered on theology and how to promote the harmonious development of mainstream culture and religious culture is indeed a proposition requiring serious exploration. I believe what currently needs to be loudly appealed for is that the Socialist Core Values [14] should lead the trends of the era and must not become lost amidst the diversification of values.
According to the perspective of historical materialism, the emergence, development, and eventual disappearance of religion possess their own objective historical necessity. As a form of the superstructure, religion is a reflection of social reality; the root of religion’s existence lies in the needs of the real world (albeit an illusory need). The forms of religion change along with changes in the social base, and religion will vanish as the social realities that produce the need for religion vanish; there is no need to eliminate religion through coercive means. As Marx noted, "Religion itself is without content, its roots are not in heaven but on earth, and with the abolition of that distorted reality, of which it is the theory, it will collapse of itself." [15]
In the primary stage of socialism, the social, natural, and cognitive roots for the existence of religion will persist for a long time. Chinese communists respect the objective laws of religious development and do not use administrative force to eliminate religion. Party leaders have proposed that we must actively guide religion to adapt to socialist society.
A Marxist party treats the resolution of the religious question as an integral part of the cause of socialist construction. We are materialists; simple ideological education cannot substitute for the transformation of social practice, nor can we conduct a "struggle against religion" in isolation, detached from the grand cause of socialist modernization. The task of the ruling party is to unite the non-believing and believing masses, seeking common ground while reserving differences [16], to jointly advance the construction of the socialist cause and gradually eliminate the social roots of religion’s existence, thereby realizing the beautiful ideal of a communist society.
In the process of building a socialist harmonious society, the ruling party must explore the relationship between the centralization of guiding ideology and the diversity of culture. Over the thirty years of reform and opening up, due to changes in social relations and the pattern of interests, social culture has shown a trend of diversification, which is an expression of social vitality. Atheism and theism, the religious and the non-religious, this religion and that religion—all living together in a socialist society—can stimulate one another, tolerate one another, and achieve "harmony without uniformity" [17] to jointly promote social progress.
At present, the Scientific Outlook on Development [18], which is vigorously advocated by the ruling party and centers on "putting people first," also contains the truth-value of scientific atheism. I believe that "putting people first" has two layers of meaning in resolving the religious question.
One layer of meaning is that the ruling party takes "serving the people" as its fundamental purpose, relying on the masses to seek happiness for the people. Believers and non-believers alike belong to the people; they enjoy the same rights, perform the same duties, and bear the same social responsibilities. Whether one believes in a religion or not should be entirely a private matter for the citizen, receiving equal protection and respect. However, in national decision-making, as we implement the Scientific Outlook on Development, there is no place for deities or God.
The other layer of meaning is to uphold humanistic concepts so that, as history progresses, the masses of the people gradually detach themselves from "religious divinity" and resolutely and sincerely return to "humanity." As Engels pointed out:
"In religion, man lost his own essence, alienated his humanity. Now that religion has been shaken by historical progress, he perceives his emptiness and instability. But he has no other means of salvation... except by thoroughly overcoming all religious concepts and resolutely and sincerely returning, not to 'God,' but to himself, can he regain his humanity, his essence." [19]
Marx pointed out: "The standpoint of the new materialism is human society." "Whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. Man must prove the truth, i.e., the reality and power... of his thinking in practice." [20] In the cause of socialist modernization, we must adhere to scientific atheism, promote the strategy of "reinvigorating the country through science and education," and, in the practice leading toward a beautiful society, prove the reality and power of our own thinking.