Religion as a System of Authority
Mikhail Bakunin was one of the most forceful anarchist critics of religion. In God and the State (1882), Bakunin argued that the very idea of God represented a denial of human freedom:
“If God is, man is a slave; now, man can and must be free, therefore God does not exist.”
For Bakunin, the problem was not simply theological but political. Religious institutions, by claiming divine authority, provided ideological justification for monarchy, class domination, and political tyranny. The Church, particularly in its alliance with the state, became what he saw as a pillar of oppression.
Similarly, Emma Goldman, in her essay The Failure of Christianity (1913), argued that Christianity’s emphasis on obedience, humility, and sacrifice served the interests of ruling classes by encouraging submission rather than resistance. For Goldman, religion, like the state and capitalism, was an obstacle to human emancipation.
Thus, from the anarchist perspective, institutional religion is inseparable from structures of authority. In a libertarian communist society—founded on equality and freedom—such institutions must lose their political and economic power.
Religion as Personal Belief and Practice
While anarchists like Bakunin and Goldman critiqued religion as an institution, they also acknowledged the right of individuals to hold personal beliefs. Anarchism defends freedom of thought as a core principle. Errico Malatesta, for instance, argued that anarchists must oppose all coercion, whether it comes from church or state, but that “everyone should be free to think and believe what they wish.”
In a libertarian communist society, this would mean the abolition of state religions, religious privileges, and clerical authority—but not the persecution of personal faith. Communities and individuals would remain free to gather for religious or spiritual purposes, provided these did not involve coercion or domination.
Kropotkin’s writings emphasize this distinction. In Ethics (1924), he traced moral development not to divine authority but to the evolutionary principle of mutual aid. Yet he recognized that many religious traditions had historically embodied communal ethics. For Kropotkin, the point was not to deny the moral impulse in religion but to ground ethics in human solidarity rather than divine command.
Morality, Solidarity, and the Anarchist Critique
The question of morality is central to the anarchist critique of religion. While religions often claim to provide a universal moral framework, anarchists argue that morality arises from human social relations. Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid (1902) demonstrated that cooperation, not competition or obedience, was the foundation of both human survival and ethical development.
In this sense, a libertarian communist society does not need religion to secure moral order. Solidarity, reciprocity, and free association provide a more stable basis for ethical life than divine authority. However, anarchists also recognize that religious communities, stripped of hierarchy and privilege, can coexist with secular forms of communal life, so long as they contribute to, rather than hinder, freedom and equality.
Toward a Libertarian Communist Society
The anarchist vision of a libertarian communist society is one in which political, economic, and religious hierarchies are dismantled. Religion, insofar as it has historically served as a tool of domination, loses its institutional authority. Yet religion, as a matter of personal belief or cultural tradition, may persist—transformed from an instrument of power into a voluntary form of expression.
In such a society:
- No church would wield political authority.
- No religion would enjoy state support or privilege.
- Education would be free from dogma, emphasizing critical thought.
- Individuals would be free to believe, disbelieve, or practice spirituality without coercion.
Thus, anarchism’s position is not a crude atheism imposed from above but a radical defense of freedom of conscience, coupled with a rejection of religion as an authoritarian institution.
Conclusion
From Bakunin’s rejection of divine authority to Kropotkin’s materialist ethics of mutual aid, anarchist thought has consistently emphasized that religion, when institutionalized, serves as a justification for domination. Yet anarchism also insists on respecting the individual’s freedom of belief. In a libertarian communist society, religion would no longer function as an instrument of state or class power but would be reduced to a matter of personal or communal choice.
In this way, anarchism reconciles its critique of religion with its broader commitment to human freedom: dismantling religion as hierarchy while defending freedom of thought as the foundation of a truly free society.
References
- Bakunin, Mikhail. God and the State. 1882.
- Goldman, Emma. The Failure of Christianity. 1913.
- Kropotkin, Peter. Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution. 1902.
- Kropotkin, Peter. Ethics: Origin and Development. 1924.
- Malatesta, Errico. Anarchy. 1891.
Original Link: https://basfbd25.wordpress.com/2025/09/27/religion-and-libertarian-communist-society-an-anarchist-perspective/
Comments