• mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    its a wrong theory and ahistorical. Religious tensions was there and it will be for many years to come. Religion brings problems and anti materialism which is a false consciousness

    • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      How so? Or maybe I’m not making my point clear. The British didn’t invent these tensions, but they did exacerbate them as much as they could, and the modern situation is a result of that far more than previous tensions.

      I agree that religion is as anti-materialist as it gets, but people are religious and will fight for their religious beliefs, you can’t just make people stop being religious overnight. I can’t imagine a truly communist society having religion really, but it’s a process that takes generations of people slowly losing the need for religion in their lives, the USSR’s attempts at suppressing religion were ultimately unsuccessful and those same religious leaders would often work with enemies of the communists to undermine and overthrow them because they saw them as a threat to their power. Unfortunately it has to be done delicately because religion is such a powerful force for reaction.

      • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        USSR was very successful in their attempts. I recently watched a video from Uzbekistan in 1970s there was neither islamic fundamentalism or closures of mosques. Don’t iterate the liberal propaganda that campaign against religion was a failure in USSR. The return happened due to the capitalism and chauvinists in every region of ex USSR states.

      • mughaloid@lemmygrad.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Bro there was saint Kabir, Meera, sufis etc. In their poems they always had written about the animosity and hatred between hindus and Muslims. British just sparked the tension in 20th century by aligning themselves with Hindus and Muslim fundamentalists. But obviously the partition was inevitable. There was either of the chauvinism, it’s Islamic supremacist or Hindus. It was just a good moment in history of India that Nehru was socialist and secular oriented. Even his colleagues were pro hindu chauvinists like Sardar Patel and etc.