Free association and the inevitability of Communism

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Anarchists have had their share of repression and execution. Likewise the Mennonites of Ukraine were tormented and robbed by Makhno's forces.

The large portion of the Catholic clergy in Spain had supported Franco and the Nationalist forces and were a legitimate military threat. It wasn’t exactly a pretty scene, but it happened.

The Mennonites in Ukraine were “affluent peasants”, from what I recall. Revolutions always have their downsides.

I mean I know that the Catholic church was certainly Francoist, but how do unarmed priests and other clergy represent the Nationalist military threat and thus have justification in murdering them?

[Bezkoshtovnya]

And what if it isn't a default utopia like you claim it will be and it in fact does not give them every single thing they need and want?

. . . then that wouldn’t be an anarchist revolution?

Or it would be, but it just isn't an immediate perfect solution to everything and is in fact not a perfect system that will be perfectly implemented as advertised, and thus there is still plenty of room for dissent. Just because it espouses giving every single person everything they need and want doesn't mean that it is necessarily practical, or even possible to do so.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

The large portion of the Catholic clergy in Spain had supported Franco and the Nationalist forces and were a legitimate military threat. It wasn’t exactly a pretty scene, but it happened.

The Mennonites in Ukraine were “affluent peasants”, from what I recall. Revolutions always have their downsides.

Priests and other clerics in north-eastern Spain were not a legitimate military threat by any means. They may have supported Franco, because of their conservatism or because of Red anti-clericalism, but there isn't any evidence that I'm aware of that shows leaving them alone would have caused a military threat to the Revolution. It wasn't pretty, it wasn't necessary and it wasn't just. The sooner anarchists disavow the murder of priests and other conservatives, the better.

Yes they were, and for that they were unfairly treated and looted like the "kulaks" of the Soviet Union.

[Anarchitaria]

The large portion of the Catholic clergy in Spain had supported Franco and the Nationalist forces and were a legitimate military threat. It wasn’t exactly a pretty scene, but it happened.

The Mennonites in Ukraine were “affluent peasants”, from what I recall. Revolutions always have their downsides.

I mean I know that the Catholic church was certainly Francoist, but how do unarmed priests and other clergy represent the Nationalist military threat and thus have justification in murdering them?

The Catholic Church in Spain followed a doctrine called integrismo. They were essentially fundamentalists and extremely reactionary even by Catholic standards, which is why a number of Spaniards at the time had a distaste for them. Besides, you don’t need to be armed to be a military threat.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

The Catholic Church in Spain followed a doctrine called integrismo. They were essentially fundamentalists and extremely reactionary even by Catholic standards, which is why a number of Spaniards at the time had a distaste for them. Besides, you don’t need to be armed to be a military threat.

Except your own source debunks your claim. Nowhere does it mention that by 1936 integrism was an official doctrine of the Catholic Church in Spain, or even that a majority or large portion of clergy followed it.

[Anarchitaria]

The large portion of the Catholic clergy in Spain had supported Franco and the Nationalist forces and were a legitimate military threat. It wasn’t exactly a pretty scene, but it happened.

The Mennonites in Ukraine were “affluent peasants”, from what I recall. Revolutions always have their downsides.

Priests and other clerics in north-eastern Spain were not a legitimate military threat by any means. They may have supported Franco, because of their conservatism or because of Red anti-clericalism, but there isn't any evidence that I'm aware of that shows leaving them alone would have caused a military threat to the Revolution. It wasn't pretty, it wasn't necessary and it wasn't just. The sooner anarchists disavow the murder of priests and other conservatives, the better.

Yes they were, and for that they were unfairly treated and looted like the "kulaks" of the Soviet Union.

Now now, I never supported their methods.

Nowadays, as there isn’t much of that fundamentalism that existed within the Catholic Church back then, it wouldn’t be as gory. Same goes for the Mennonites.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

I mean I know that the Catholic church was certainly Francoist, but how do unarmed priests and other clergy represent the Nationalist military threat and thus have justification in murdering them?

The Catholic Church in Spain followed a doctrine called integrismo. They were essentially fundamentalists and extremely reactionary even by Catholic standards, which is why a number of Spaniards at the time had a distaste for them. Besides, you don’t need to be armed to be a military threat.

I'm certainly not saying I agree with their ideals and views, but I still don't see how you can hint that their mass murder was justified. Why not imprisonment or.....really anything besides outright engaging in mob violence and murder against them? If they were armed themselves or actually committed some sort of crime, then maybe a judicial execution would make sense. But these were extrajudicial killings committed by mobs due entirely to blind hatred for the Church than any actual crime or threat, lets be real.

[Anarchitaria]

The Catholic Church in Spain followed a doctrine called integrismo. They were essentially fundamentalists and extremely reactionary even by Catholic standards, which is why a number of Spaniards at the time had a distaste for them. Besides, you don’t need to be armed to be a military threat.

I'm certainly not saying I agree with their ideals and views, but I still don't see how you can hint that their mass murder was justified. Why not imprisonment or.....really anything besides outright engaging in mob violence and murder against them? If they were armed themselves or actually committed some sort of crime, then maybe a judicial execution would make sense. But these were extrajudicial killings committed by mobs due entirely to blind hatred for the Church than any actual crime or threat, lets be real.

I wouldn’t particularly condone such acts myself, but it happened and it happened for a reason. That’s about all there is to it.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

I'm certainly not saying I agree with their ideals and views, but I still don't see how you can hint that their mass murder was justified. Why not imprisonment or.....really anything besides outright engaging in mob violence and murder against them? If they were armed themselves or actually committed some sort of crime, then maybe a judicial execution would make sense. But these were extrajudicial killings committed by mobs due entirely to blind hatred for the Church than any actual crime or threat, lets be real.

I wouldn’t particularly condone such acts myself, but it happened and it happened for a reason. That’s about all there is to it.

I suppose, but the reason it happened wasn't at all as you are trying to retroactively frame it, and it was instead simply due to blind hate and mob violence rather than any actual organized reason and justification.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

I wouldn’t particularly condone such acts myself, but it happened and it happened for a reason. That’s about all there is to it.

It happened for a reason seems to suggest or imply that the mob killings had legitimate justification for happening. I wouldn't say "it happened and it happened for a reason" to describe the Holocaust. It's technically true, but gets across an immoral and apologetic stance.

[Anarchitaria]

I wouldn’t particularly condone such acts myself, but it happened and it happened for a reason. That’s about all there is to it.

It happened for a reason seems to suggest or imply that the mob killings had legitimate justification for happening. I wouldn't say "it happened and it happened for a reason" to describe the Holocaust. It's technically true, but gets across an immoral and apologetic stance.

Indeed, but not all reasons are necessarily good reasons. The Holocaust happened because Jews were thought to have been treacherous (with no evidence) while “finances” lead to some outrageous conspiracy theories that I will not dignify with a platform. Of course, that was a horrible reason, and it was a vicious game of scapegoating in order to instill nationalism and xenophobia amongst the Germans.

[Socialist Workers Combine]

I suppose, but the reason it happened wasn't at all as you are trying to retroactively frame it, and it was instead simply due to blind hate and mob violence rather than any actual organized reason and justification.

You’re talking about the Church, if anyone is a cause of blind hate and mob violence it is the Church, which to this day molests children while decrying the LGBT as the end of the world.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

I suppose, but the reason it happened wasn't at all as you are trying to retroactively frame it, and it was instead simply due to blind hate and mob violence rather than any actual organized reason and justification.

You’re talking about the Church, if anyone is a cause of blind hate and mob violence it is the Church, which to this day molests children while decrying the LGBT as the end of the world.

That....doesn't now justify the indescriminste murder of members of its clergy, especially when looking at the Spanish Civil War.

[The Two Jerseys]

There are black people in American prisons?

Well shit, that totally makes lining your political opponents up against a wall and gunning them down with 20mm antiaircraft guns okay!

[Hakons]

I suppose, but the reason it happened wasn't at all as you are trying to retroactively frame it, and it was instead simply due to blind hate and mob violence rather than any actual organized reason and justification.

You’re talking about the Church, if anyone is a cause of blind hate and mob violence it is the Church, which to this day molests children while decrying the LGBT as the end of the world.

Your response to the mentioning of slaughtered priests.... is to turn around and blame the Church? Not really sure why this forum is allowing such terrible behavior. At least you're showing everyone how crappy your ideology is.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

You’re talking about the Church, if anyone is a cause of blind hate and mob violence it is the Church, which to this day molests children while decrying the LGBT as the end of the world.

That....doesn't now justify the indescriminste murder of members of its clergy, especially when looking at the Spanish Civil War.

As much as I show great contempt for organized religion and the politicized hierarchy of the Catholic Church (even as a de jure Catholic), the mass murder of clergy and the destruction of religious infrastructure is never fucking justified.

[Socialist Workers Combine]

Your response to the mentioning of slaughtered priests.... is to turn around and blame the Church? Not really sure why this forum is allowing such terrible behavior. At least you're showing everyone how crappy your ideology is.

This has nothing to do with my ideology, I am specifically intolerant of nonsense. And I welcome priests to renounce their child molestings, but last I recalled the Pope blamed the gays. By all means let priests denounce the Pope. I denounce the Pope, and I encourage you to denounce the Pope, and not for any ideological or religious reason.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Your response to the mentioning of slaughtered priests.... is to turn around and blame the Church? Not really sure why this forum is allowing such terrible behavior. At least you're showing everyone how crappy your ideology is.

This has nothing to do with my ideology, I am specifically intolerant of nonsense. And I welcome priests to renounce their child molestings, but last I recalled the Pope blamed the gays. By all means let priests denounce the Pope. I denounce the Pope, and I encourage you to denounce the Pope, and not for any ideological or religious reason.

Pretty sure Francis has actually acknowledged the sexual scandals of the catholic church and certainly hasn't blamed it on gay people, to my knowledge. Regardless you do realize that not every priest is engaged in molestation? And the fact that some are is still not grounds to indescriminently murder people for being members of clergy and vandalize churches?

[Socialist Workers Combine]

Of course they shouldn’t be killed, they should assist in Siberian construction project.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.scmp.c ... se-scandal
https://www.thedailybeast.com/gay-pries ... -sex-abuse

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Of course they shouldn’t be killed, they should assist in Siberian construction project.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.scmp.c ... se-scandal

Good thing my statement was about Pope Francis and not the Pope from 15 years ago.

And yeah, no, forced labor and imprisonment of the entire clergy based on the detestable actions of some priests is still not fucking okay. Collective and indiscriminate punishment is not okay. That is kind of the point here.

[Socialist Workers Combine]

And yeah, no, forced labor and imprisonment of the entire clergy based on the detestable actions of some priests is still not fucking okay. Collective and indiscriminate punishment is not okay. That is kind of the point here.

Why not? Their god does it. That seems like a good reason. And they don’t all have to go to Siberia. Some can go to prison.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

And yeah, no, forced labor and imprisonment of the entire clergy based on the detestable actions of some priests is still not fucking okay. Collective and indiscriminate punishment is not okay. That is kind of the point here.

Why not? Their god does it. That seems like a good reason. And they don’t all have to go to Siberia. Some can go to prison.

Yeah no it....it isn't a good reason at all actually. Just as sending all Muslims to prison in because of the actions of ISIS is not justified, or sending all communists and socialists to prison for the actions of the FLQ or the SLA is not justified, it is not justified to send all members of the clergy to prison or worse because of the actions of other priests.

[Socialist Workers Combine]

They uphold the child molesting institution. Would you join a child molesting institution? I’m willing to accept that people are just dumb, so get them some alternative thing to buy into. Put the uncontrite ones away. I am willing to personally educate you in spirituality so you don’t have to support the child molesting church. They’ve been doing it for decades, they cover it up.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

They uphold the child molesting institution. Would you join a child molesting institution? I’m willing to accept that people are just dumb, so get them some alternative thing to buy into. Put the uncontrite ones away. I am willing to personally educate you in spirituality so you don’t have to support the child molesting church. They’ve been doing it for decades, they cover it up.

No, they don't. Those that are in some way complicit in the cover ups however do, and they of course should be also prosecuted under the law. The average priest that does nothing but be a priest is not deserving of your sweeping punishments. You confuse my protests of your edgy anti-theist collective punishments with somehow supporting the Church or being a member of it, but that is not the case, seeing as how I am an atheist. No one is saying there aren't cover ups and that there are those priests that do heinous things, but your fervent anti-theism and collective punishments are not justified. Do you do this with all groups? If there are members of a group that do terrible things then clearly all members of said group are in someway supportive of those things and are all guilty simply because they are members of the same group?

[Minzerland II]

Of course they shouldn’t be killed, they should assist in Siberian construction project.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.scmp.c ... se-scandal
https://www.thedailybeast.com/gay-pries ... -sex-abuse

Big LOL

Both Benedict XVI (though I’ll ignore the blatant misinterpretation of his essay) and Francis are absolutely correct. The 1960s and gays ARE the problem.

You know how I know this? Because your article cites ‘Fordham University’ and ‘Massimo Faggioli’ and ‘gay priests’. Pozzed. Anyone who cites these aren’t to be taken seriously.