IS COMMUNISM CHRISTIAN?

Evening Star, Issue 22458, 1 October 1936, Page 7

IS COMMUNISM CHRISTIAN?

TO TCI EDITOR. Sir, —“ Anti-Communist’s ” lack of argument in his latest effort has caused him to revert to personalities, but let that pass. When 1 described the teachings of Christianity as a set of rules governing man’s behaviour I referred to the purely moral lessons that are the really practical and unanimously accepted part of the Christian religion. Belief in the supernatural is entirely another matter, and rests with the individual to decide ffor himself. An understanding of natural law and evolution, which is necessary for complete understanding of Marxism, gives an alternative explanation of those things which religious people accept as being the works of an all-powerful God. However, the Communists make no attempt to suppress anyone’s beliefs. All they say is that if there is a Supremo Being then He niade the Communists as well as the Christians and the Fascists. And let me add that many professing, church-going Christians do not really believe—they only think they do. If, in their innermost hearts they really believed the Bible there would be very few claimants for the benefits of personal riches when the price is eternal damnation. —I am, etc., Social Scientist. September 30.

TO TEB‘ EDITOR. Sir, —“Anti-Communist,” in his reply to-night evades every specific point that I stated. He states that Marx advised his followers to exercise “ audacity, audacity, audacity.” Well, what would he desire? Surely not complete passivity. It is the audacious person that gets things done. What 1 object to is your correspondent’s interpreting a statement to create a false impression. When Christ said “ Be ye wily as serpents hut harmless as doves” he was not asking any one to behave like a rattlesnake. Your correspondent says that I am keen that Christians should practise Christianity. I am very little concerned with any specific form of religion—that is purely a personal matter. What concerns me is that everybody should act in a decent manner, and that the law of the jungle, the survival of the fittest or most cunning, should come to an end. “ Anti-Communist ” misinterprets my statement of Communism. We claim to be doing right with a private competitive system but some of our rugged individualists, when things are not going too well, have the “ audacity ” to ask the community for a subsidy to increase the dividends of private shareholders. If our present system is right, sink or swim, then manifestly subsidies for . some ,are wrong. We are told of the immutable laws of finance, the inexorable law of: supply and demand, yet Capitalism never had such a demand for men as it had in 1914. Conscription overcame the inexorable, however, and got one million men for the most dirty and dangerous woilk at Is a day (Communism for the Army, individualism for tho financier). I appose this is what your correspondent means when he

says “ both individualism and collectivism have their place and uses,” so why does he not sign himself “Half-and-half Anti-Communist”? Communism will be no more static than Capitalism is. As goods and services increase so will the standard of the community as a whole rise. During my first 10 years in this country the farmers have more than doubled their output, yet Mr Coates, who is no Communist, claimed 50 per cent, were bankrupt—a state of affairs neither Communist, Christian, nor common sense.—l am, etc., C. S. MacAkxhub. September 30. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In reply to “ Lip Service ” 1 would ask what does it matter who coined the phrase “ opium for the peopl .” That does not alter the fact that Marxism and Communism are anti-religious and atheistic. To suggest that Communism is Christianity

is to suggest that blood is water, that putty is iron, or that drivel is wisdom. The question whether current Christianity is in need of reform is another matter, and one that I would . gladly discuss with anyone. For Marxians to attempt to prove Communism is Christianity may be moral according to Communist morality, but in the light of the current morality of our time, it is humbug, and indicates either profound ignorance o± a deliberate attempt to deceive.—l am, etc., Anti-Communist. October 1, [This correspondence is now closed. —Ed. E.S.]