Chapter 24: Capitalism and Religion

Religion is a part of the human experience which expresses undeniable dimensions of the human psyche, heart and soul.

Sadly, Karl Marx observed religion using and being used by corrupt power structures to keep the vast majority of people submissive, which was why he wrote his famous statement that "Religion is the opiate of the People." Soviet and related interpretations of Communism tried to end religion by criminalizing and suppressing it. Yet, in the post-Soviet reality in formerly Soviet communities, religion resurged almost undiminished after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

This is largely because the human psyche often responds to suppression and threat of punishment with the appearance of compliance while covertly defying suppression. This is one human trait that most despotic regimes fail to grasp: punishment does not truly create lasting, willing compliance. It actually strengthens resistance in the long run.

Reinforcement (not enforcement) of desired behaviors and absence of reinforcement for non-desired behaviors is truly effective, though never 100%, which is not a negative thing. Furthermore, attempts to suppress behaviors and attitudes that are inherent, inseparable parts of being human, will tend to fail on the large scale even if they succeed in some individuals in the short run. No amount of suppression could ever produce a population who do not eat, sleep, have sex, talk, seek entertainments or find some religious expression. Such suppression may leave many feeling guilty and conflicted about practicing forbidden behaviors, but they will persist.

Yet Marx had a valid point. Religion has often been used, and is still being used today, to keep people submissive and to otherwise manipulate populations to do things they would most likely not be inclined to do otherwise. Suppressing it, however, is not the solution to this kind of abuse of religion.

The United States Constitution (and other similar Constitutions) sets forth separation of Church and State as a fundamental principle, guaranteeing freedom of religion. This is absolutely essential for any society to bring forth fulfilled, free, empowered, fully actualized human beings constituting a fulfilled, free, fully actualized human community.

Tragically, under conditions of religious extremism, difficult questions can arise.

In the United States at the time of this writing, the concept of “religious freedom” or “religious liberty” is being systematically distorted into a justification for allowing those higher in the economic pyramid to force and enforce their religious views upon those lower in the pyramid. Where ownership confers dictatorial powers, the majority of people are forced by Capitalist dynamics to work for businesses owned by wealthy neo-Feudal Lords and to live in buildings owned by other wealthy neo-Feudal Lords. In such a setting, the concept that business owners’ and landlords’ “religious liberty” gives them the right to discriminate against employees, applicants, and clients on the basis of religious beliefs, in practice deprives the majority of people of any rights or religious freedom whatsoever. In such a paradigm, one who owns no place on the earth, has no rights in any place on the earth. Some existing religious beliefs are quite extreme, including religious beliefs against homosexuals, interracial couples or unmarried couples cohabiting, women in the workplace, women dressing as they please, use of birth control, eating certain foods, even beliefs against the very presence of members of other religions.

Examples are widespread. The currently dominant faction is pushing hard to undo hard-won protections for employees and consumers in favor of legally protecting the “right” of employers, lenders, landlords, educational institutions, healthcare providers and others in positions of power to discriminate against employees and customers based on claimed religious beliefs. In practice, there are numerous cases emerging of businesses whose CEO’s don’t believe in birth control or abortion refusing to cover either in employer health plans, businesses refusing service to customers and landlords refusing to rent to applicants based on their gender preference or even their religion, discrimination against women in the workplace, pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions based on their religious beliefs, civil servants refusing to issue wedding licenses due to their religious beliefs, and even a documented case of a construction worker who was fired for refusing to attend weekly religious study meetings off the job. If the current regime is successful in establishing these concepts in both law and legal precedent, it would mean that if a CEO’s religion holds that women shouldn’t be in the workplace, or that they should only hire members of their own religion, then they would be allowed to discriminate against women and members of other religions. Companies run by people whose religions mandate vegetarian diets would be allowed to refuse to hire, or to fire, people who eat meat. Employees could die when businesses run by members of a religion that prohibits blood transfusions (such as Jehovah’s Witnesses) would be allowed to exclude coverage of any procedures involving transfusions from employee health coverage. These scenarios are playing out as you read this. This battle is being fought at this very moment. Occurrences of this kind of abusive discrimination are multiplying as those in power push their advantage to seize greater power over those below them in the Pyramid. They are aware that they currently have a historically strong degree of control over the dominant faction in government, and they are aggressively pushing to accelerate and consolidate their neo-Feudal power.

The fact that this concerted effort is being carried out under the banner of “religious freedom” or “religious liberty,” is particularly insidious and pernicious, since these are very sympathetic-sounding terms. This is very much by design. Anybody who speaks up against this takeover can easily be painted as an enemy of religious freedom. Yet the reality of the intent is anything but religious liberty or freedom. The argument supporting them is that an employer’s “religious liberty” is being violated if they are required to hire people to whom their religion objects, or to cover medical procedures that their religion forbids. Similarly the argument goes that landlords shouldn’t have to rent to people who have traits that the landlord’s religion objects to. Yet this legal effort under the heading of “religious liberty” makes no effort whatsoever to protect the “religious liberty” of the employee, the applicant, the customer, the individual. There is no effort being made to protect the rights of applicants, renters, employees, and customers to live their lives safe and free from harassment based on their own religious beliefs.

The larger context here is the consolidation of power even more firmly into the hands of those at the top of the economic Pyramid, which always disempowers those lower in the Pyramid. Remember that under Capitalist paradigms, wealth, control and ownership confer rights, access, freedom, options and respect. The lack of these negates rights, freedom, access, options and respect. The current “religious liberty” effort is aimed at giving those high in the Pyramid even greater power over the lives of those lower in the Pyramid. If the ones in power object to your religion, lifestyle, ethnicity, eating habits, mode of dress, personal relationships, or anything else at their discretion, they will be allowed to exclude you from livelihood, access to goods and services, and a place to live. Though it will not be the government per se denying you your freedom, it will nevertheless be no different from the situation under official dictatorships: live and believe as the neo-Feudal Lords dictate, or go without any rights and any way to live, knowing that the government will support the neo-Feudal Lords should you challenge them.

This is one more current example of how even though the people can achieve some gains in rights and protections through concerted, sustained efforts on a large scale, under Capitalist paradigms the pressure and control of the neo-Feudal Lords at the top of the Pyramid will always overwhelm and out-create the influence of the people in the long run.

In any post-Transition society, religious freedom must be understood and interpreted as applying to the person, to the individual, and not extending to others. Nobody and no entity will have the right or power to deny access, goods, services or anything whatsoever to another for any reason in any public setting. Religion will be no exception. Of course one will have the right to be friends with whomever one chooses, form relationships with whomever one chooses, and to have the sanctity of one’s home and life be respected. But nobody will be allowed to exclude or discriminate against others.

For example, those whose religion condemns homosexuality will be protected from being pressured or coerced into homosexual relationships or expressing agreement, but will be expressly prohibited from denying goods, services or civility to homosexuals or harassing them in any way. Those whose religious beliefs prohibit eating pork or meat of any kind will be free to eat according to their beliefs but not allowed to interfere with the eating habits of those who do not share their beliefs. Those who believe that it is necessary to be legally married to live together will be free to marry before cohabiting, but will be prevented from denying goods, services, or civility to those living together unmarried. Those who believe that women must cover themselves will be free to do so, but will not be free to interfere with, harass, or discriminate against those who do not share that belief.

One’s religious liberty cannot ever be allowed to interfere with the freedom, respect, and quality of life of others. Any within a religious community who wish to exit it will find that their right to do so will be protected. Similarly, in the post-Transition communities, the concept of ownership will apply to a person’s or family’s own residence and items for personal use only – there will be no recognized or enforceable concept of owning land, items or facilities used by another.

Distribution and production of goods and services will no longer be under “private” control. Such endeavors will be democratically, consensually run by those involved in the processes, under supervision of the People, as a public service for the benefit of each and all. There will be no economic or command pyramid, no corporations, no neo-Feudal Lords with dictatorial powers over an enterprise.

While most religious organizations operate peacefully in good faith, doing a lot to improve the human condition, there are still too many religious organizations of every faith that distort religious teachings in order to advance personal or institutional agendas involving power, money and control over Society. These include Mega churches, countless local and regional churches, Scientology, a wide assortment of cults, ashrams and other groups in the U.S.A.; ISIS, ISIL, Boko Haram, Talibán, and Al-Qaeda in the Arabic world and Africa, and more.

Some of these are driven by simple greed that exploits religion to generate a constant flow of money and power from congregants to the leaders. Some are driven by the self-aggrandizement of charismatic megalomaniacs motivated by delusions of grandeur, addiction and compulsion to exert power over others. Still others are driven by sincere fanaticism which leads adherents to believe that forcing their beliefs on others is doing God's will and benefiting those so coerced in the long run. All of these are abuses of religion that we must be ever alert to avoid reinforcing in any way.

The first kind of abuse of religion, simple greed, will be rendered largely impossible in a paradigm where money is obsolete or unnecessary. The end of Capitalism will be the end of this kind of distortion of religion.

The second and third kind of abuse and distortion are more problematic and challenging to minimize.

Though religion has been abused and used to justify abuse, it has also been the motivation for inspiring and heroic acts of altruism and love for Humanity and for one's fellow beings. We would not benefit from throwing out the baby with the bathwater so to speak.

A peer-oriented socio-economic paradigm will inherently have few or no reinforcers in place for abuse of authority, position, rank or wealth since these will have little or no existence. Plentiful reinforcers for co-operation, mutuality and synergistic symbiosis will over time cause these kinds of behaviors to predominate.

There is no guarantee that unhealthy hierarchical dynamics may not emerge among small populations - within a family or community - due to interpersonal dynamics. However, such situations will not have a chance to expand, become set in stone, institutionalized or enforced, since the prevailing social dynamics in the community will not create fertile conditions for this to happen. The typical person will be unreceptive and resistant to such dynamics, and the society will have no mechanisms to encourage such patterns, which will be healthily and reasonably perceived as dysfunctional.

A population conditioned from birth to respond predictably to advertising and propaganda is more easily manipulated than a population raised in an atmosphere of open dialog, exploration and critical thinking. Trained from the beginning to recognize manipulative propaganda and behaviors as part of childhood education alongside language, math, and science, such educated people will be distinctly difficult to manipulate, dominate or intimidate.

Consider also that empowered, fulfilled citizens who are mostly happy with life are much less vulnerable to the appeals of extremist charismatic demagogues than disempowered, disenchanted, discouraged frustrated citizens. It seems very likely that in the more synergistic post-Transition paradigms, demagogues and cultists will find very few individuals who are susceptible to this kind of dynamic.

If this is so, then the second category of religious abuse (self-aggrandizement and power-lust) will most likely never reach proportions to become a danger to the well-being and freedom of the society as a whole. Such occurrences will for the most part be easily contained and treated therapeutically. We will need to be observant and watchful during the first years after the Transition, however, as the cultural and sociological readjustment will take time until at least one generation has a chance to grow up to adulthood in the new paradigm.

The third category of religious abuse is more problematic.

Fanaticism rooted in sincerely held faith is abusive to those outside the fanatical population; yet this is not a conscious or deliberate abuse of religion. Such zealots sincerely believe they are saving people or bringing them to the True Way. That is why it is the most difficult to address.

Sometimes the atrocities committed by such populations are conceived, carried out and perceived by the perpetrators as doing the will of God, saving the souls of those they coerce, bringing in a superior, higher morality for the greater good. The Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, modern-day Al-Qaeda, Boko Haram and Taliban, the Orthodox communities in Israel which seek to force all Israeli Jews to live an Orthodox life, and Hindu extremists in India who try to force shotgun weddings on any couple they see being affectionate in public are all examples of this. So is the case of the delusional mother who was certain that the Devil was going to take her children and so killed them in order to send them to God.

These dynamics are much more complex. Often they involve historical traditions that go back hundreds or even thousands of years, strengthened and ingrained deeper by having suffered persecution at one time or another. Often such sub-populations have a shared reality in which religion, ethnic and cultural identity, geographic location and other factors are all perceived as one and the same thing at the heart of the participants' identity as individuals and as a community.

Such groups will not hesitate to force their beliefs, customs and values on others via political and legislative processes, economic domination and even violence and force of arms. When two such groups encounter one another, a religious "holy war" almost always results. Regardless of who comes out victorious, those who do not share their beliefs always suffer, often horribly.

Experience shows that attempts to directly suppress such dynamics will only serve to strengthen and deepen the degree of fanaticism, entrenching it more firmly and creating a sense of martyrdom. It also aids recruitment efforts as they inevitably come to be perceived by the uninformed as a persecuted minority, leading some well-meaning compassionate people to become sympathetic and even to join them.

A truly compassionate, empowering, synergistic society is incompatible with suppression as a response. Other approaches need to be researched, developed and implemented.

The new paradigm would not survive takeover by a Crusade, a Jihad or the like. On the other hand, it will not survive a purge or "cleansing" even of religious extremist groups. This will be a major challenge for the people of the new paradigm. It is unlikely that full and definitive answers will emerge in this writing, only some general guidelines and principles along which to proceed.

Strict adherence to separation of Church and State is absolutely essential for any free society to truly guarantee freedom of religion. This principle protects the integrity of both religion and the mechanisms of governance.

In the new paradigms, money will be nonexistent or of minimal or no importance, so will not act as a motive for any kind of behavior. Lawmakers, politicians, judges and other public officials will be far less susceptible to financial and most other kinds of bribes and inducements that are common under Capitalism. Such officials will be more directly accountable to the people, their activities more transparent than under the current paradigm. It will be harder for special interest groups of any kind, including religious ones, to influence these people.

With the shift away from punitive, blame-oriented cultural attitudes, opportunities for blackmail will be greatly reduced though of course not eliminated. With positive reinforcers built into the paradigm for honesty and therapeutic rather than punitive responses to violations of public trust, there will be less fear of exposure of officials who do have something to hide.

If fanatical religious extremist groups or individuals do use, or attempt to use, violence or coercion to force their ways onto non-consenting people, it will need to be addressed swiftly and appropriately. Violence (except among consenting participants as in boxing, martial arts, extreme fighting and similar sports) and coercion have no place in a healthy, synergistic society. Those who engage in such behaviors must be prevented from continuing to do so. This must be done swiftly and firmly upon discovery, but as humanely and compassionately as possible with emphasis on rehabilitation and therapy wherever practicable. Yes, in some extreme cases some kind of confinement may be necessary, probably along the lines of the Norwegian prison model where inmates are prevented from harming others but otherwise treated with respect, enjoying as positive an existence as possible. Violence or coercion on the basis of religion needs to be treated no differently than that committed for other reasons.

If such groups and communities harm, harass or coerce no one, then there is no reason to interfere with them unless they are subjecting members to duress or coercion in any way (i.e. forced marriages, mutilations, forced consumption of drugs or participation in rituals against their will, preventing them from leaving or contacting people outside their community).

Religion is a highly personal matter, even among those who share a religion, that needs to be respected. Since none of us is any more God or Goddess than the other, we must seek to create a society that engenders mutual respect among all religions (including those who are agnostics, atheists and non-religious) where each individual will feel safe and free to pursue their own personal process of exploration, discovery, and practice of their faiths.