Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Spike or Victoria University College Review 1932

Communism as a Religion

page 35

Communism as a Religion

"Heaven forbid that you should Believe in anything."

Dr. Henning.

I.

It is the first virtue of a critical mind that it will accept no fundamental proposition merely because it comes from tradition or convention or authority. Moreover, if we wish to ascertain the effect and assess the value of social institutions we must recognise that what appears most obvious, even in our strongest convictions, may often prove pure illusion. It is for this reason that Dr. Henning's maxim—casually mentioned in the course of an address the other day—is imperative and invaluable. As soon as one allows one's sympathies to obscure an issue, to confirm articles of faith of which one will allow no questioning, then the bright hope of independent thought has surely flickered and gone.

Communism is every whit as much in danger of this evil as any other social or political creed, and it seems that its advocates may well become as dangerous and false in argument as the most bigoted of religious zealots if they persist in their present tendency.

Discussion has revealed a large body of opinion which could be more aptly described as socialistic than communistic if only for the reason that it has declined to accept the dogmatic insistence of the communist theorem and its persistent tendency to re-duce to a matter of religious faith the convictions of impartial criticism and a passion for justice. The critical attitude that demands some fundamental measure of social reform loses its most eminent virtue when it is replaced by this religious frame of mind that will brook no doubt or wavering, no tolerance of dissent or discussion, no room for a change or development in point of view.

To make this accusation against the most passionate of Communists is in many cases unfair and ill-considered; and it is rather too readily levelled at anyone who sees the chaos of our present system with the intensity of violent revolt against needless inhumanity. It is all too convenient a shaft for every passing critic; and those who have thought of economics only in terms of laissez-faire are naturally prone to feel that disinterested action can proceed only from religious urge. But for all that, and granting the exigencies of the necessity for action, the advocates of basic social reform are themselves all too little aware of some of the dangers in their path, as their methods of propaganda seem to prove beyond question, They are apt to assume the attitude of muscular tension which dispels all doubt and hesitation, and leads them in pledge themselves to a great cause without that open-minded, ever-vigilent scepticism which is essential in any new adventure.

II.

Middleton Murry relates how he was attacked in "The Daily Worker" as "nothing but an anti-working class politician and a particularly scurvy one at that." His request for the right of reply was emphatically refused by the Editorial Board—a faithful band of religious devotees—who asserted, on the inspiration of their lofty faith (how reminiscent of the noble motives of the Inquisition!) that they did not publish articles (or even replies, apparently) from the pens of individuals whose policy they considered to be deliberately anti-working class. His claim to be a Communist, they said, was "an insult to the heroic workers of the Soviet Union and a mockery of the Communist fighters throughout the world."

If this is to be the response to the ethical passion of a sincere man, even though he be mistaken as they believe, then we may well be guarded against "the infantile disease of Communism." Nor is it any reply to this criticism to argue that Middleton Murry is not truly a Communist; for members of the Party are fond of asserting that Communism is open to criticism from the outside, although it would seem that criticism as serious as Mr. Murry's can arouse nothing beyond personal abuse. The primary political maxims of Communism are in fact held absolutely immune from doubt or criticism. It has been correctly said that in their insistence on the basic principles of their faith Communists are more uncompromising than the converts to page 36 Islam ever were in their affirmation that there is but one God, and Mahommed is His Prophet.

To embrace Communism in this way, so that doubt or dissent becomes a sin, and criticism an unpardonable error, is to make it a religion, and eventually to follow in the forlorn, ill-fated ways of those whose power and intolerance brought the Russian peasants to the last pitch of revolt. It may be that Communism is a philosophy as well as a doctrine of "pure and immediate action," but it should beware of the ever-present danger of becoming a "religion" in which the opportunity for dissent and the necessity for serious analysis may be crushed by the singleminded urgence of religious faith.

III.

Vain is the regret of the conservative as he observes that Communism has the support of able and eminent thinkers the world over, that it has the driving force of a passionate devotion that Capitalism could never earn,—no, not in a shipload of centuries. But it is imperative to remember the limitation of Communism, and the danger that lies in making it the exclusive object of one's energies. It is essentially an economic creed, with a programme of political action, and it remains so, however much it may be the application of an ethical ideal.

One may clearly observe in communist writing a certain pre-occupation with the Soviet system which has resulted in a deplorably narrowed point of view. Russian history is regarded as the inevitable forerunner and counterpart, even in matters of detail, of identical developments which are anticipated in other countries, although these are wholly dissimilar in political and economic structure, traditions, and level of culture. And in much the same manner one finds this attitude expressed in the communist tendency to under-estimate the significance of personal relations beyond the sphere of economics. It is of course, elementary that economic equality is the mean to equality in almost every other sphere of human activity. But I refer to the attitude which excludes any values outside the promotion of the communist policy.

In education this is clearly seen. One is forced to suspect the truth of the suggestion that among the Soviets a "ne varietur" might be written over the halls of instruction. In art the same story may be told. In no capitalist country has art been so entirely reduced to the position of the mere tool of propaganda.

But the methods of politics, art and education are but means to greater ends. There is another and a purer air than commerce and economics. And so long as Communism remains the mere interpretation of unassailable dogma there can be no hope for the just recognition of values other than those which the Party has considered and accepted. In so far as Communism is shaped in a religious mould, then for all the fiery ardour of its humanity it will be unable to appreciate the importance of many of the cultural needs of man and unfitted to receive the passionate adherence which it asks of men to-day.

—I.D.C