Debate:Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or communism?
|!||THIS IS A DEBATE PAGE, NOT AN ARTICLE. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of Conservapedia.|
Your opinion is welcome! Please remember to sign your comments on this page, and refrain from editing other user's contributions.
New Users: Please read our "Editing etiquette" before posting
Apples and Oranges
PhistWell, one is a religion and one is a societal structure, so to a degree we are compairing apples and oranges here. You could, in THEORY have a country that is both communist and islamic. While religion was of course banned in communist russia, by that point they were so far from the ideal of communism that it really should have been called something else.
For the record, I like apples better.
Islam is more powerful. Commumism was a good idea in theory but it has failed enough times in real world countries that I'm ready to discount it as a valid possibility. It simply doesn't address some aspects of human nature, and I think it's only real power right now is as an alternative to capitalism for a working class tired of being poor. But one only has to point to the still-smoking ruin of the USSR to discount the validity of that ideal.
On the other hand, Islam carries a supernatural message of hope to an entire continent of anti-american people raised with extremism being a daily reality. When a man with complete hatred of something is told that destroying his enemies is holy, and that there is a place in heaven for those who die fighting, the man is turned into a weapon. Islam is volatile like no other religion in the world, and though I try to avoid bias any of us can turn on the news any day of the week to see turmoil in the middle east. In fact, I cant even think of the last time in history the middle east went 15 years without a major armed conflict.
Considering that there are over 1.4 billion Muslims I'd say it was Islam that is the more powerful ideology. Communism is like third, and the second is Secular Humanism for the most powerful ideology. Unless you consider that Secular Humanism is new age communism? --Orion Blastar 23:30, 9 March 2007 (EST)
Actually, the Soviet Union never banned religion. It suppressed religion quite severely, especially in the 1920s and 1930s. However, the Soviet constitutions always included nominal guarantees of religious freedom. Also, Stalin made a point of restoring the legal position of the Russian Orthodox Church during the Second World War (part of his wartime efforts to appeal to Russian nationalism).
Islam. Communism is fundamentally flawed.
A more accurate characterization of Soviet religious policy would be to say that the regime persecuted and clamped down on official churches, religious leaders and the like, but that its main efforts focused on making religious leaders, priests, imans, etc. agents of the state, and to dissuade religious practice through education. This reflected an official belief (which many scholars would argue had its origins in Enlightenment ideals about reason and progress) that with improved education, scientific achievement and general social progress, Soviet citizens would come to recognize the falsity of religion and would thus turn their backs on religion of their own accord.
Moreover, while many term the Soviet Union an "atheistic regime," this is perhaps technically accurate, but wildly misleading. The Soviet government was "atheistic" in the sense that it did not have an established religion (such as the Russian Orthodox Church), but in this respect it was no more atheistic than the U.S. government has always been, or how any number of other states are, where the separation of church and state prevents the official establishment of a particular religion.
Religious belief and practice never ceased to exist in the Soviet Union, nor did the Soviet government ever formally proscribe it. --SmithHall 03:01, 10 March 2007 (EST)
"Islam is volatile like no other religion in the world, and though I try to avoid bias any of us can turn on the news any day of the week to see turmoil in the middle east. In fact, I cant even think of the last time in history the middle east went 15 years without a major armed conflict." -Orion Blastar
This is an interesting statement. Does anyone remember history? What about the Christian crusades from 1095 to 1270 that accomplished little more than death and destruction? The third crusade was even focused on ransacking Constantinople, a fellow Christian state, for little more than funding further crusades. The crusades even turned internal targeting parts of southern France and the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II after he was excommunicated from the church by the Pope for returning to port after becoming ill on his way to accomplish the 5th crusade (which he later accomplished through peaceful means). There are many examples of volatility as well as many current examples of radicalism in Christianity.
"Considering that there are over 3 billion Muslims, and a good number of them are radicals or terrorists, I'd say it was Islam that is the more powerful ideology." -Orion Blastar
Also an interesting statement. Islam is the second largest religion in many European countries and only 20% of Muslims are from the Middle East. If Islam were so innately hate filled and "a good number of them" were radicals, why aren't more areas of the world with prominent Muslim populations "anti-American?" Just as an example, the two largest Muslim nations in the world are India and Indonesia - non-Arab. What is going on here is a gross generalization of Muslims and Islam. Think back to our very recent history here in the US. The KKK (Klu Klux Klan) was a very heavily religious organization. What religion did they espouse? Christianity of course. The KKK was responsible for many murders and terrorist acts and is still alive today. Should we generalize all Christians and Christianity to match the KKK? Should we say that "a good number of" Christians are radicals or terrorists because of the actions of the KKK? I would hope not and I'm sure you feel the same way. --Blubuster 02:18, 11 March 2007 (PST)
I vote Islam. Or Communism. Wait...what was the question? Who's got the oil? Mmmm....oil.
Islam. We haven't seen many Communists blow themselves up to go to that great workers paradaise in the sky which they don't believe exists anyway. And Communism as a civil government lasted about 70 years, whereas Islam as a civil government has lasted 1400 years. That is 70/1400, or 5%. Not much comparison. RobS 20:55, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
Islam is NOT an ideology, it is a religion.
Ideology holds no power without behavior to support it. One may think that it is perfectly okay to strap a bomb to themselves or take private property for the sake of the government, however; until it is actually done, the ideology has no objective power.
To answer the question, look at the effects. How many people follow the ideology for how long ? It is pretty clear that Communism did not the have adherence, of all of those under it. Contrawise, Islam persists mainly because it is adhered to by its followers. Communism in Russia and China failed, those governments changed, while Islam is alive and well today. Terryeo 15:58, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
Islam. Relgions have a bad habit of hanging around longer that political philosophies. But its an absurd question.
Ironically I chose my name before seeing this...
and I think both are false hoaxes compared to most other problems (corruption, environmental degredation, and incessant foreign intervention).
Islam is a religion not a political ideology(although like Christianity it has been used to justify political actions in the past and present) so communism would be because it is the only political ideology on that list.--Fg 11:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
Well communism is almost dead and Islam is on the rise...you pick... --Wally 19:32, 26 June 2007 (EDT)