<\/p>\nThe limits of political emancipation are evident at once from the fact that the state can free itself from a restriction without man being really free from this restriction, that the state can be a free state [pun on word Freistaat, which also means republic] without man being a free man.<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Bauer himself tacitly admits this when he lays down the following condition for political emancipation:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEvery religious privilege, and therefore also the monopoly of a privileged church, would have been abolished altogether, and if some or many persons, or even the overwhelming majority, still believed themselves bound to fulfil religious duties, this fulfilment ought to be left to them as a purely private matter.\u201d [The Jewish Question, p. 65]<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is possible, therefore, for the state to have emancipated itself from religion even if the overwhelming majority is still religious. And the overwhelming majority does not cease to be religious through being religious in private.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\nBut, the attitude of the state, and of the republic [free state] in particular, to religion is, after all, only the attitude to religion of the men who compose the state.<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n It follows from this that man frees himself through the medium of the state, that he frees himself politically from a limitation when, in contradiction with himself, he raises himself above this limitation in an abstract, limited, and partial way. It follows further that, by freeing himself politically, man frees himself in a roundabout way, through an intermediary, although an essential intermediary. It follows, finally, that man, even if he proclaims himself an atheist through the medium of the state \u2013 that is, if he proclaims the state to be atheist \u2013 still remains in the grip of religion, precisely because he acknowledges himself only by a roundabout route, only through an intermediary. Religion is precisely the recognition of man in a roundabout way, through an intermediary. The state is the intermediary between man and man\u2019s freedom. Just as Christ is the intermediary to whom man transfers the burden of all his divinity, all his religious constraint, so the state is the intermediary to whom man transfers all his non-divinity and all his human unconstraint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n […]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Man emancipates himself politically from religion by banishing it from the sphere of public law to that of private law. Religion is no longer the spirit of the state, in which man behaves \u2013 although in a limited way, in a particular form, and in a particular sphere \u2013 as a species-being, in community with other men. Religion has become the spirit of civil society, of the sphere of egoism, of bellum omnium contra omnes. It is no longer the essence of community, but the essence of difference. It has become the expression of man\u2019s separation from his community, from himself and from other men \u2013 as it was originally. It is only the abstract avowal of specific perversity, private whimsy, and arbitrariness. The endless fragmentation of religion in North America, for example, gives it even externally the form of a purely individual affair. It has been thrust among the multitude of private interests and ejected from the community as such. But one should be under no illusion about the limits of political emancipation. The division of the human being into a public man and a private man, the displacement of religion from the state into civil society, this is not a stage of political emancipation but its completion; this emancipation, therefore, neither abolished the real religiousness of man, nor strives to do so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From Karl Marx – On the Jewish Question<\/p>\n\n\n\n The political emancipation of the Jew, the Christian, and, in general, of religious man, is the emancipation of the state from Judaism, from Christianity, from religion in general. In its own form, in the manner characteristic of its nature, the state as a state emancipates itself from religion by emancipating itself from the state religion […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":125,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[22,24,21,77],"class_list":["post-119","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-jewish-question","tag-christianity","tag-judaism","tag-marx","tag-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=119"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1619,"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119\/revisions\/1619"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/125"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=119"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=119"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=119"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp.audiopathik.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/7120dKeQtUL._AC_UF8941000_QL80_.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"