It's essentially because a) Marx condemned religion in Das Kapital referring to its as 'the opium of the masses' - ie that it was a mechanism by which the rich and the bourgeois kept the working classes under their thumb and satisfied with their lot (by suggesting that their reward would come in the next world for their subservience in this) and b) more pragmatically because priests and religious leaders worry dictators because they can form a frame work for unrest and rebellion. North Korea is the most brutal recent example, but China, Soviet Russia and to an extent Vietnam have all done the same (in Vietnam they persecuted Catholics, but turned a blind eye to Buddhism .. this has more to do with Catholicism being seen as a tie to imperial French days)
In addition, suppressing religion also removes any authority higher than the state. God may say one thing, while The State tells you to do the opposite. Since The State can only reward you while you're alive, and Gods rewards are eternal, who are you going to listen to? Ironically, Marx also called religion (paraphrasing) "a sigh of oppression," meaning that it's a natural response of people living under oppressive conditions, and that the more the state tries to suppress religion, the more need that people have for it and will therefore gain more of a foothold.
Religion is huge in my If Eternity should Fail series. The series takes place on a world called Triskele. In Athar, the Triskele equivalent of Europe, a faction representing the 'one true god' called the Anekons squared off against the region's pantheon gods. After a hot war that ended with the destruction of the so called Dreadgods, the Anekon declared victory even though the pantheon gods and their worshipers are far from beaten. I'm trying to write my religious characters as actual characters, people who do things out of their own individual needs instead of just to progress the plot. It is so easy to 'shame write' a group or character that I don't see eye to eye with. But, I challenge myself to get in that character's shoes and write them as someone with a heart and soul. Let them organically develop in the story and let the reader form their own likes and dislikes about the characters. I've been surprised so far by the characters I've actually grown fond of and the ones I've disliked. Hopefully, so will the reader. Godspeed!
The irony being that Marx saw capitalism as oppressive but Marxism (although he never called it that) as a path to freedom - mind you he also said that the only country ready for revolution at the time was Britain.
Well, I agree with Marx on that count, but literally every system of government that gives one person authority over another will be.
Marx actually critiqued Capitalism. Capitalism isn’t simply about oppression. That is a pretty myopic view given that the market is open to all. The narrative of “freedom” and “oppression” is almost completely bogus. People simply don’t want much freedom, they want everything for FREE. That’s just plain naive. Capitalism has served humanity well. It’s not ideal and the other options available are far worse. Maybe someone will come up with another idea soon enough that has substance and is actually possible to put into action. Like democracy capitalism works well enough to over all pull humanity out of the gutter a little more - there are obvious problems with both due to the hubris of people.
The exact same thing could be said about literally every other form of government. Despotisms would also be the perfect form of government if not for the people running them.
No, nor does politics. I want to write for everybody. If I started giving my characters religions, I feel like I would start to limit my audience.
That's nothing to laugh or LOL about. Not everyone has religious freedom. Communism is a real thing. None of that is funny. I think you have a lot to learn about how the world works. You're either very young or just unaware. Maybe it's time to grow up and pay attention to the world around you.
I was being cynical. It was not laughing laughing. May be LOL was not the correct word to put. There you go.
Well, that depends on how you do it. If you hand them precisely your religion and your politics, and paint everyone else as bad guys, sure. But on the other side of the spectrum, if you make every single character purely generic on two important aspects of human life, you're giving up a fair number of opportunities for characterization. I find myself thinking of the Rabbi Small mysteries. They obviously touch on religion a lot, but the first one, in 1965, won an Edgar award, and apparently as recently as 2009 the Guardian was recommending it in their "1000 novels everyone must read" list.
There are people out there who do think their religion or political stance is the only right one and everyone else is wrong. I feel like if I start giving my characters religions or political stances when it's not absolutely necessary, those people who are like that but are the opposite or whatever of the character might just put the book down. If I wanted religion or politics to play a major role in my stories, they would. It's just that that's not what my stories are about, so I kind of just leave it out. I feel like even if you do it correctly, you're still at a potential to lose readers because of those extreme people who believe only their religion/political stance is correct.
I'm not disagreeing with your position for you, because it's your position for you. For me, if I tried to make my writing appeal to an absolute maximum of readers, it would just become too bland. Again, not saying yours is or will be bland. But mine would be--removing too many sources of offense would take too much of the seasoning out of it.
I think it's pretty hard to write anything involving human beings that doesn't involve some level of commentary on religion or politics. Even if you're not mentioning the topics explicitly, the absence of an explicit comment is a form of statement. Like, if you write a character in crisis who doesn't think about God or ponder the teachings of his or her church or whatever, then you're probably writing a character that is, if not fully atheist, at least agnostic or not very religious. The absence of religion IS a statement on religion. I think something similar is at work with politics. You could very well write characters who don't mention political parties or politicians, but there are connections between the way people think and behave and their political leanings, right? You aren't mentioning political parties, but politics, in a general sense? Pretty hard to escape.
Communism aside, religious Freedom doesn't actually exist in countries where religious freedom is supposedly a thing. Don't believe me? Try going this year without celebrating Christmas citing 'religious reasons' as an excuse. Sure, you're probably not going to get sent to a work camp, but society in in general is sure as heck going to try it's best to make you wish you had.
Could it be argued that many of the Christian holidays function as both secular and religious events? Like, I'm not Christian, but I sure like having two weeks off in the middle of winter and I like getting and giving presents and I don't have a problem with Santa Claus. But I don't go to Midnight Mass or anything. I'd say I'm celebrating secular Christmas. Same with Easter, really. I'll eat all the chocolate and I like the 4-day weekend and bunnies are cute, but I don't do anything religious about it...
But when you're part of a religion that specifically doesn't celebrate Christmas because of it's close ties with the Roman festival of Saturnalia, things get a little tricky.
Religious freedom is virtue-signalling at best. What do you think would happen in most countries with 'religious freedom' if you announced you were a born-again follower of Tlaloc, and demanded the right to sacrifice people on top of a giant pyramid? And in most countries, 'religious freedom' was never meant to mean you could believe anything you liked. In the US, for example, it was only ever intended to cover the different denominations of Christianity, to minimize conflict between them in the new nation. The founders never imagined that the country would be full of non-Christians, and their Christian-only immigration policy was designed to ensure that. Back more on topic, God is a major character in the last novel I wrote, but he's a very British version of God (i.e. he swears a lot and complains about the missus), not an American version of God. I tried hard to ensure the book didn't end up in a Christian fiction category on Amazon because I didn't think devout evangelists would like it much.
Why are we talking of clothes? Also now if I read anything you write story wise, I will just imagine all your characters as naked. Saves time and worrying about guessing the wrong shirt color.
I think I know that one. It's the one with the [Redacted] and the big weird [Redacted] and there are a bunch of really strange [Redacted] that try and [Redacted], and the MC has an odd hobby, right?
