In recent years, especially within liberal left circles, the claim that communism is a religion has been voiced. Later, this discourse spread to other sides of the political spectrum as well. What this claim actually implies is that communism resembles the very thing it criticizes.
Common Characteristics of Money, religion, communism and popular culture
| Element | Traditional Religions | Communist Ideology | Popular Culture | Money |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Aim | Eternal happiness | Happiness in this world | Instant gratification | Happiness through dominance over others |
| Cult Figures | Prophets, saints, dervishes. | Revolutionary leaders, theorists, worker leaders. | Influencers, stars, visionary entrepreneurs. | The wealthy, celebrities |
| Sacred Text | Revelation-based scriptures (Qur’an, Bible, etc.). | “Scientific” texts (Manifesto, Capital). | Top 10 lists, guides, multimedia | Credit reports, risk reports, financial news |
| Rituals | Almsgiving, pilgrimage, fasting, confession. | Party meetings, parades, commemorations, statues | Shopping, launch tracking, social media sharing. | Stock market opening session, profit-taking, tax declaration |
| Iconography | Cross, crescent, sacred places. | Hammer and sickle, red star, raised fist. | Brand logos (Apple, Nike). | Dollar, euro, lira symbols. |
| Heresy | Sin, apostasy, blasphemy. | Revisionism, bourgeois collaboration, counter-revolution. | Being “out of trend,” being outdated, being cancelled | Bankruptcy, poverty: exclusion from the system |
Unpopular Conceptual visions
Communism is, of course, not a structure based on supernatural power and therefore is not a religion. However, it resembles religion in other elements. It even derives its popularity from the same features that make religion popular. The real question is: can something that does not resemble religion spread widely in society? Do all conceptual visions share similar characteristics?
Every conceptual promise, vision, suggestion, or message that seeks popularity evolves toward similar shared characteristics. There are also traditions that do not aim to be popular and therefore do not share these traits. For example, the philosophical tradition inherits dialectics differently from the rhetorical legacy above. Rather than persuading people toward an ideal through manipulation, it strives for the victory of discussion.
The central message of philosophy is “how much we do not know.” A philosopher who admits ignorance and asks for the other’s view will, of course, not become popular compared to leaders who pretend certainty. Because the masses seek simple answers and easy gains. They adopt simple labels, construct their identities around what appears powerful, and exploit words rather than invest effort in understanding them. From the outside it looks absurd, yet since most people pursue the same plunder, they sustain an economy by convincing one another.
The Tragicomic Cost of Labels
As religion, ideology, or consumer culture spreads through subjects who simplify their messages in pursuit of popularity, they become increasingly diluted. The essence of religion and ideology fades like a whisper passed from ear to ear and begins to serve purposes other than originally intended. As people claim certainty, concepts can no longer be updated or restored to their essence.
What Should We Do?
Communism is not a religion, but like every label circulating in the public sphere, it is reductive and prone to corruption. Like every element of popular culture, it cannot escape conceptual decay. Semantic shifts resist updating under rhetorical insistence, and due to concept fetishism, persistence in error becomes a form of worship.
The human body and brain tend toward belief rather than questioning because questioning requires energy. Only by adopting inquiry as a duty to humanity — by respectfully challenging the religions, ideologies, and money we hold in esteem — can we truly understand them.
As our bodies grow, we assume we have left childhood behind; yet very few of us escape conceptual childhood. The individual, a product of their environment, cannot mature mentally unless they question what is popular. When examined carefully, what is popular often appears diluted, childish, and ineffective. The cost of becoming understandable to everyone is becoming simplistic. Most of us remain childish in most matters. However, regarding issues that shape our lives and guide serious decisions, we must at least preserve a measure of doubt.
Communism may not be a religion, yet it has been drawn into this vortex through popularity. Instead of trying to rescue it, we might free it from its loaded terminology and discuss its ideals on a different plane.
