IS COMMUNISM CHRISTIAN?

Evening Star, Issue 22456, 29 September 1936, Page 10

IS COMMUNISM CHRISTIAN?

TO TKX EDITOR. g; r —lt seems that my attempt to explain the historical necessity and purpose of Communism was wasted on “ Anti-Communist.” His confusion is amply displayed in his reference to Communism as a danger to Christianity, and his statement that Christianity has failed to prevent the appearance ot Marxism. An examination of the principles defined bv these terms shows that there is really no common ground upon which they can clash. The teachings of Christianity are no more or less than a set of rules, inspired by humanitarian motives, for the guidance of the behaviour of the individual in his social activities. Communism is concerned with the fundamental principles within which those social activities take place, and before Christianity can be used to oppose Communism those rules must be added to or misinterpreted to suit the purposes of reaction. In fact, nothing would be more satisfactory to Communists than the guarantee that their opponents would strictly adhere to the rules of Christianity. For, though Communists are humanitarians, they are also realists or scientists, and they know that the privileged and selfish minority are likely to resort to violence and other Fascist methods to prevent a change, the social necessity for and significance of which they do not and cannot understand. It is in the advocacy of preparedness for this most undesirable development that Marxists have been grossly misunderstood. Their belief that force would have to ■be met (and this has proved true in several countries already) has been deliberately misconstrued as a desire for violence and bloodshed. Coinmunists do not desire violence. But if force is to be used to defeat the aims of the majority, they believe that, in the interests of civilisation itself, any means necessary to overcome it will be justified. Of course, in different countries the conditions vary in degree. As regards England, for instance, let me quote from Engels's preface to the first English translation of Marx’s 1 Capital,’ in which he says of Marx: “ Surely at such a moment the voice ought to be heard of a man whose whole theory is the result of a life-long study of the economic history and condition of England, and whom that study led to the conclusion that, at least in Europe England is the only country where the inevitable social revolution might be effected entirely by peaceful and legal means. He certainly never forgot to add that he hardly expected the English ruling classes to submit without a ‘ proslavery rebellion ’ to this peaceful and legal revolution.” This may help to show “ Anti-Com-munist ” that class hatred and class war . are not methods introduced by Communists, but are a natural and inevitable condition of Capitalism. They arise from the economic relations between the employer and the worker, the interests of the employer demanding that he pays as little as possible in wages, and the needs of the worker ever prompting him to demand more. The Communists support the workers in this struggle, not only because they are chiefly workers themselves and the working class constitutes the majority in modern society, bub also because the improvement in the standard of living of the working class is ultimately in the best interests of society af a whole. Finally, Marxists do not pretend to be able to alter the course of history by planning what society should do, but they do claim to know what changes have taken place in the past and why they took place, and as a result of this knowledge are able to tell what changes must and will take place in the future. —I am, etc., Social Scientist. September 28.