ded@aplvax.UUCP (04/09/84)
I read somewhere that when Karl Marx uttered his "religion is the opium of the people" remark, he meant it in a positive way. Positive in the sense that opium at the time of Marx was an invaluable medicine. Can anyone shed any light on this? -- Don Davis JHU/APL ...decvax!harpo!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!ded ...rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!aplvax!ded
myers@uwvax.ARPA (04/11/84)
>I read somewhere that when Karl Marx uttered his "religion is the opium >of the people" remark, he meant it in a positive way. Positive in the >sense that opium at the time of Marx was an invaluable medicine. Can >anyone shed any light on this? > Don Davis No, he didn't. If I recall correctly, this quote is from "On the Jewish Question", a response to Bruno Bauer's "The Jewish Question". Marx was not arguing that religion is a priori bad, only that it tended to be used by the ruling elites to keep people from questioning their condition in secular society.
riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) (04/11/84)
No Marxist scholar I, but the way I heard it explained, a good
modern idiomatic translation of the phrase would be "the anaesthetic
of the people". "Anaesthetic" because opium was used at the time as
such, and because Marx was asserting that religion is effective at
keeping people from paying too much attention to their suffering.
Whether you consider that a "good" or a "bad" trait of religion is, of
course, a matter of opinion.
--- Prentiss Riddle ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.")
--- {ihnp4,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddle