861.404/2–2149: Airgram
The Chargé in the Soviet Union (Kohler) to the Secretary of State
A–179. The Komsomol1 Magazine Young Bolshevik No. 3 for February 1949, for the second time within a month, carries an article attacking religion. (See Embassy’s no. A–150, February 14, 1949.2) The author, P. Cherkashin, attempts to answer a question posed by a reader who says that he cannot understand why some contemporary bourgeois scientists defend religion and an anti-scientific outlook regarding the world.
The author begins his reply by stating that, for the majority of Soviet people, it is entirely clear that a religious-idealistic viewpoint regarding the world is false from beginning to end. A belief in the [Page 576] existence of an eternal, all-powerful creator is the deepest kind of confusion and deception. All religious fables concerning the creation of the world and of man by God, regarding heaven, the effectiveness of prayer and the immortality of the soul not only have nothing in common with science but are directly contradictory to it. “Religion and science are irreconcilable antagonists.” According to Cherkashin, the entire history of the development of science is the history of the struggle against the belief in God, the fight with all kinds of prejudices and superstition. After mentioning scornfully the British scientists Jeans and Whitaker for their attempts to reconcile science and religion, the author passes to an attack of American scientists, who are said to be especially frank and open in their warfare against materialism and their defense of the popist, anti-scientific viewpoint.
First and most important of the reasons for the defense of religion by the bourgeois scientists is said to be the class interest of the exploiters. The author explains that, in accordance with the teaching of Marxism, the bourgeois scientists in general are the serfs of the capitalists. They are forced to work in the interest of the latter as hired servants and lackeys. Thus, the scientists are called upon to uphold religion, which is used by the ruling class as a means of enforcing its domination. As confirmation of his contention that science in the countries of capitalism is not free and does not serve the interests of progress, the author cites the alleged concentration of the American scientists on military projects. In this connection, the appointment of Gen. Eisenhower3 as rector of a university is mentioned sarcastically, with the comment that there is no need to talk of the kind of “pure” science which the General will develop.
As other reasons for the support of the religious viewpoint by the “bourgeois” scientists, the author mentions the fact that under conditions of capitalism it is of course difficult to rise to the level of understanding scientific materialism. Also noted is Lenin’s statement that religion is always used to explain scientific questions which are as yet unsolved. The inability of science to create artificially a living cell from dead atoms is quoted as an example of the type of problem which is used by the defenders of religion as a means for the propagation of fantastic tales concerning the heavenly origin of life.
The author concludes that there can be only one answer to the question put by the reader: Notwithstanding the fact that, under conditions of capitalism, life itself generates a religious-idealistic outlook concerning the world, the active support of popery by some bourgeois scientists is occasioned in the main by the class interests of the bourgeoisie and is conducted with the direct aim of defending the bourgeois yoke.
[Page 577]This article, aimed at the Komsomol reader, is another example of the current line of the Communist party regarding religion, which calls for a campaign of “scientific enlightenment” to overcome survivals of religion in the consciousness of the Soviet people.