Toward a Marxists-Muslims Dialog - Part IIa

II. Mutual disrespect and mistrust

Let me acknowledge right here that at the level of ideology there are some irreducible, fundamental differences between Marxism and Islam. Therefore, let us not be facetious by simply trying to gloss over all the differences as if there is not any. Indeed, in some contexts, Muslims do need to remind themselves and others of those differences. One should also understand that at certain such level, Marxists may also understandably remind themselves of those differences.

My purpose is, however, to look at the nature of the differences, explore how do we deal with those differences, and seek to find common grounds as a basis of reducing such differences, wherever possible. In a difference-emphasizing model or approach, one starts with the differences, keeps finding differences, and then magnify those as well as find more and more differences. In a
common-ground-seeking approach, one starts not with the differences (even if there might be some irreducible ones), but with what might be common. One might not need sophisticated rationale from either side to make the case that according to neither Islam nor Marxism, differences, where they can be reduced, would still be valued, sought and defended like treasures.

The current state of affairs is such that there is virtually no mutual trust or respect between the adherents of the two ideologies. As I like to put it, Muslims view the Marxists as condemned to the Hell, and the Marxists don't mind at all to "condemn" the Muslims to the Heaven! But it is more than just condemnation. In many societies the differences have compounded to conflicts, sometime bloody and quite ugly. Let's take a closer look from the vantage point of each side with the hope to identify some common grounds in the process.

a. To be Marxists is to be anti-religion (anti-opium)?

The fact that Communism has a political-economic system that has basically been abandoned since the collapse of the former Soviet Union should not fool us to think that the underlying conviction about the Marxist philosophy has weakened. This is because Marxism is more than a political-economic system or ideology. Secularism, humanism, materialism etc. are at the core of
Marxism, and abandoning those should not be expected to be automatic with abandonment of the political-economic aspects of Marxism. The influence of Marxism has been deep in our societies and continues to be so in different forms.

Many of us, while we were lot younger, used to be fond of everything "red." I remember that my own bookshelf, when I was in college years in Bangladesh, was dominated by red color. There were, at least, three reasons. First, the market/society was inundated with colorful, glossy, inexpensive material from the Soviet Union and China. Much of those literature was also available
free (just for asking from the right sources). Just try to remember the cost difference between Time or Readers Digest on one hand, and Udayan or similar magazines on the other. Second, those "red" literatures were intellectually more challenging, satisfying and sophisticated than Namaz Shikhkha, Qasasul Ambiya, Maqsudul Mumineen (which used to be common to almost every Muslim home in Bangladesh). Of course, for the less sophisticated, there were "Chhotoder Arthoniti"-type books from the other side of the border. But one could proudly show off on his or her shelf, and at least, appear intellectually superior, if one had The Communist Manifesto or the likes. You were already in (intellectual) "heaven" - of course, Marxists don't believe in any such thing - if you had Theories of Surplus Value or Das Capital. [Confession: I also had those last two sets in my meager collection. I have a PhD now in economics, but those are still as jaw-breaking to me as they were during my college years.]

Third, there was a probably a deeper and more serious reason for being attracted to the left (even though when we used to march, it was not left-left, but left-right, somehow ending up on the "left" side). It's is the powerful and sophisticated humanistic message and orientation of Marxism. It wasn't too difficult for anyone to see why there was - and still is - a great deal of validity to equate religion with opium.

References:

Stanley Aronowitz, The Crisis in Historical Materialism: Class, Politics and Culture in Marxist Theory (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1991, 2nd ed.)

Marx-Engels Archive
(http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1837-pre/1835-ref.htm )

Ali Shariati, Marxism and Other Western Fallacies: An Islamic Critique
(Berkeley, CA: Mizan Press, 1980)

Robert Tucker, The Marx-Engels Reader (Norton, 2nd Edition, 1978).

[... continued in Part IIb]