its like when kids where told to get under their desks if a NUCLEAR BOMB went of near by, i think its just there to say they are doing something.

this has nothing to do with protecting working people, right wing infighting is not my problem. its curious how defensive u are of religion in this context like if nazis and libertarians fight u would bat an eye but when these 2 particular right wing ideologies fight its a huge deal for u, maybe u have some stuff to think about.

My misplaced violence? i have never attacked anyone nor do i want to, im just very justifiably afraid of the violence of religion, it has never been atheists that been behind religious related violence it has always been religion and its followers.

if they care about burning a holy book they are reactionary. if it was about race or immigration status i would care but people fighting over religion is not my problem.

and yeah thats quite charitable because it can just as easily be interpreted as defending religion from even being able to be criticized under the guise of preventing right wing infighting.

hatred isnt some random quirk of some religious institutions it is literally written into most holy books. there is nothing about soda that makes it inherently lead to death squads but the bible states quite clearly the supposed virtues of slavery and murdering infidels and the oppression of women and plenty more, most other religions dont fair any better under any examination. if u wanna talk about a magical fantasy world where religion is devoid of the horrible institutions that have upheld it and been upheld by it for thousands of years go ahead but it has nothing to do with the actual reality of religion as it has always does and seemingly will continue to exits so leave me out of those fantasies.

And yeah i will certainly argue that when right wingers fight we should stay out of it im certainly not going to argue for defending neither side in an argument where both sides worship a god that want me fucking dead for being a non believer cuz if someone looks at that fucked up shit and say yeah thats my stuff, thats where my morality comes from, that what i want to follow it can only mean that they agree.

And to be clear some of the problems with religion like the abuse of children (in the form of indoctrination specifically) goes all the way down and it carried out by just about every member of these cults and have little to with the institutions.

using that quote to defend religion is like defending the state by quoting the “Paris Commune” if that supports any view its mine.

it is not the dominating factor in most capitalists societies right now and its terrible enough as is.

why should we care when reactionaries fight each other.

yeah and in plenty of those societies religion WAS the hierarchy. how could we ever even eliminated class society while also preserving organizations and ideologies to which hierarchy is inherent.

people who practice polygamy or drink a lot of sugar dont have a systematic problem with child rape, nor have they gonna around justifying genocides nor do they have organizations dedicated to marginalizing others nor do said organizations dedicated themselves to indoctrinating more people into their fucked up cult, nor is indoctrinating children before they even have the ability to think critically a crucial, essential, and ubiquitous part of their creed.

are u seriously trying to compare drinking sugary drinks and sexual freedom (mostly from the backwards cults u are defending) to some of the most dangerous and destructive ideologies and organizations ever to ravage earth?

did u happen to forget that religion has exists as it does today and in even more oppressive forms for thousands before capitalism came around? the idea that capitalism is making something that has been bad long before capitalism even exists bad is straight up a historical.

there are a lot of muslims in India certain areas are majority muslim and religion has caused tension with their majority muslim neighbors, i imagine they cant afford to be careless about things like this.

i mean if we only disagree on whether a hypothetical communists society in the future could actually abolish authority altogether, then whatever i welcome them they are still wrong but i dont mind. But generally anarchist on the anglosphere internet means radlib who buys into all the western propaganda about socialist countries but still want to be leftists and these types can fuck off, to somewhere where they can read a book.

could have just said “so a slave should not have complained about his conditions because he ate his masters food and worked for him?” or pointed out that everything they have is made in China and everything they wear in Vietnam

because he was Chinese and the artist is racist.