With all do respect, why should Wei or some others on this list think
they have the poetic sensibility to discuss Pound's religion when they
so freely distort his political/economic record. I agree with Tim
Romano's brief assessment.
Consider Pound in light of a poet who did literally believe in the Greek
pantheon, Friedrich Hoelderlin. (I've spent considerable time with
Hoelderlin because I've spent considerable time with Heidegger, and,
yes, Heisenberg and quantum figures largely in my work, so I'm very
experienced in arguing these questions with myself and others.)
Hoelderlin's intensity is palpable and led to a series of breakdown's
and eventual insanity. Bread and Wine is so lucid, so clear, that one
fears for the mind that wrote it.
Pound, too, of course, has some of Hoelderlin's intensity. Critics often
mistake his poetic intensity for anger and hate, not at all unexpected
because the critics are inextricably bourgeois even as some of them post
radical credentials.  This is not what a poet means by radical. To a
poet such radicalism is conformist. (Please Note: I'm distinguishing
between poet and someone who merely writes poetry from the comfort of
the bourgeois morass.)
Consider the unlikely cabal of Pound, Heidegger and Heisenberg.
Certainly, attempts have been made to discredit Pound's poetry because
of his fascist affiliations and anti-semitic tirades. Even a little more
strained but still amply represented are attempts to see fascist and
antisemitic elements in Heidegger's philosophy. However, when it comes
to Heisenberg his matrix mechanics and Indeterminancy Relation are not
scrutinized for fascist or antisemitic affiliation, even though it has
been amply demonstrated, in part by Heisenberg himself, that physics
indeed does have an epistemology which would in turn implies a social,
political and even aesthetic hermeneutic. The closest you come is the
discussion, once offered to me by an engineer, that how unfortunate it
was that the physicists of Heisenberg's generation entered into
philosophical speculation around the 'visualization' problem in quantum.
Of course, the engineer as well as many other scientists who have
blessed us with books, had his own 'philosophical' opinions on such
matters, unencumbered by the efforts of, say, Kant or Husserl. And the
approach, like Chomsky's, is, of course, positivist and innately tied to
the stewardship of western progress.
In Washington today its 98 degrees. The newspaper literally said don't
"breath the air." Like many poor folk without air-conditioning, I seem
to have little choice but to "breath the air." Excuse me if I take my
'radicalism' to a new level. One that doesn't conform to bourgeois
presumption. One where the poet's dwell. Carlo Parcelli