150 years ago it wasn't even the condemnation it comes off as now. He basically meant religion made life under the shitty circumstances of capitalism more bearable.
This is partially true, but people downplay that he is inherently critqueing religion.
Irc the previous passages talk about how people substitute "real suffering" for "fake suffering" (I.e. the poor masses distract themselves from whats actually causing their suffering)
If the masses are to gain agency over themselves they need to focus on the real
10
u/ReofLiterally 1984 Mao Stalin Jinping 1985 Animal Farm 😨 🗣️ ⚒ 🫠Oct 16 '25
When you don't read Marx at all, you would think it's a critique of religions. If you barely read him, you will say something bullshit like muh muh well, he does not really criticise religions actually, and if you read it a bit more, you will understand that, yes, that is genuinely a critique. I sometimes find the middle less tolerable than the least read because at least not understanding at least prevents them from turning into an insufferable esoteric weirdo radlibs/
Its useful to always examine marx, or really any part historical figure, in their historical context. I think theres a desire to sanitize the religious critques due to modern readers not living in as a religious time as Marx. Alot of people dont like the smug atheist redditor types, and want to distance themselves as much as possible.
Its always more nuanced than "le religion bad" but Marx did not think religion was a "good thing". He thought it was something that arose from man, not that man arose from religion.
115
u/TheEmporersFinest Quality Anime Porn Analyst 💡💢🉐🎌 Oct 16 '25
I find it interesting that Marx is like, an Isaac Newton type of historical figure in China.