[ptero]

Another vote for "this is likely good".

I was a student in the former Soviet Union in early 1990s when the old system collapsed, taking with it stipends that were sufficient for school cafeteria food. After that I occasionally worked for 30 cents per hour doing somewhat-synchronous translation for preachers who came from the US to convert the masses.

While the money sounded laughable (the US minimum wage at the time was $4.25/hr) and some employers got borderline uncomfortably weird, working 4-5 evenings for a week allowed me to feed myself for a couple of months and focus on my studies. I never considered myself to be taken advantage of. Just my 2c.

[oneoff786]

Who were they trying to convert? Russian orthodox into their denomination?

[ptero]

In early 1990s most of the population was declared atheists, but because atheism was one of the pillars of the rejected Soviet rule it was being reexamined by the people. So there was a lot of orgs of all kinds who flew in to preach and increase their denomination base.

The fact that to the outside Russia looks orthodox Christian today mostly reflects last 20 years of the state efforts to build an official religion, not some deep predisposition of the population. My 2c.

[david12345]

Yes and no, it is definitely easier for the state to build on existing 19 century traditions then to invent a new religion..

[ptero]

I think those 19th century religious traditions were thoroughly gutted by the second world war and 70 years of state suppression.

But a bigger question is why does a secular state is building a state religion?