NationStates

Kowani wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:What if it's religion?

It is possible to find meaning in being wrong, yes.

So you would allow this, correct?

Also, you could quit being a condescending dick.

Torrocca wrote:

Kowani wrote:Cough. The idea is that life is about living. The rest is window dressing. The answer to existentialism is absurdism, not ignorance.

And what the fuck's the meaning behind living? Why is your idea of what living is meant to be supposed to be the only valid interpretation? Why can't or why shouldn't people find faith or belief in something that exists beyond any scientific or material knowledge that gives us a greater purpose? Inquiring into such possibilities regarding our existence rather than outright dismissing them - as you do - isn't ignorance, it's a pursuit of knowledge.

Well y'know why not live
we're living anyways

I have been arguing a lot on the forums and it really makes me want to write down all my thoughts on the theory I believe in... Mostly influenced by Makhno and Proudhon

so im probably going to do that when I get the time, will share with yall when its done

Its likely to be not the most well written or elegant and yall are definitely smart enough to pick my ideas apart like vultures but oh well... im inspired right now

Grand Proudhonia wrote:I have been arguing a lot on the forums and it really makes me want to write down all my thoughts on the theory I believe in... Mostly influenced by Makhno and Proudhon

so im probably going to do that when I get the time, will share with yall when its done

Its likely to be not the most well written or elegant and yall are definitely smart enough to pick my ideas apart like vultures but oh well... im inspired right now

Strike the Iron while its hot. No matter how clumsy or messy it is, you can always refine it later.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Kowani wrote:It is possible to find meaning in being wrong, yes.

So you would allow this, correct?

I mean, for someone who’s already religious, I would not come down and force them to recant. But to pass it on? Nah.

Also, you could quit being a condescending dick.

I could. But am I going to? Nah.

Kowani wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
And what the fuck's the meaning behind living?

Whatever one desires it to be.

So then you don't actually want to abolish religion.

Why is your idea of what living is meant to be supposed to be the only valid interpretation?

That’s odd. I never claimed it was.

Seemed pretty heavily implied by your earlier claims of wanting to abolish religion, but, as noted above, you've made it clear that that's not what you want to do.

Why can't or why shouldn't people find faith or belief in something that exists beyond any scientific or material knowledge that gives us a greater purpose?

When you find proof, let me know. I’ll be waiting. Religion has had thousands of years to prove its claims, and it still can’t do better than “wait until you die.”

Inquiring into such possibilities regarding our existence rather than outright dismissing them - as you do - isn't ignorance, it's a pursuit of knowledge.

Oh, no. You see, if it was actually in the pursuit of knowledge, it would be provable. With, you know. Evidence. As the majority of the religious people on this board will be happy to inform you, it is a matter of faith, not evidence.

I guess that people hunting the cure for something like prion disease isn't a matter of pursuing knowledge, since they haven't yet discovered evidence for how to cure such a disease. /s

Not all evidence is in-your-face or easy to find. You do know this, right?

Kowani wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:So you would allow this, correct?

I mean, for someone who’s already religious, I would not come down and force them to recant. But to pass it on? Nah.

Also, you could quit being a condescending dick.

I could. But am I going to? Nah.

Then you're going on the ignore list. I have better things to do than continue talking to petulant teenagers whose entire political beliefs boil down to angst and grandiose delusions.

Kubra wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
And what the fuck's the meaning behind living? Why is your idea of what living is meant to be supposed to be the only valid interpretation? Why can't or why shouldn't people find faith or belief in something that exists beyond any scientific or material knowledge that gives us a greater purpose? Inquiring into such possibilities regarding our existence rather than outright dismissing them - as you do - isn't ignorance, it's a pursuit of knowledge.

Well y'know why not live
we're living anyways

I mean, living for the sake of living's good and all, but that sounds (and feels, at least from personal experience) pretty dull and boring compared to living for a purpose beyond the self, whether that purpose is derived from worldly conditions or from otherworldly faith.

Kowani wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Also, you could quit being a condescending dick.

I could. But am I going to? Nah.

NSG does not disppoints me tonight.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Kowani wrote: I mean, for someone who’s already religious, I would not come down and force them to recant. But to pass it on? Nah.

I could. But am I going to? Nah.

Then you're going on the ignore list. I have better things to do than continue talking to petulant teenagers whose entire political beliefs boil down to angst and grandiose delusions.

How unfortunate. I was beginning to enjoying the discussion between you two.

Torrocca wrote:

Kowani wrote: Whatever one desires it to be.

So then you don't actually want to abolish religion.

To respond the same way I did to UMM: I would not have to police come down to a Christian’s house and force them to recant. That’s impractical. But passing their beliefs on? Nah.

That’s odd. I never claimed it was.

Seemed pretty heavily implied by your earlier claims of wanting to abolish religion, but, as noted above, you've made it clear that that's not what you want to do.

Well, congratulations on missing the point of banning religion.

When you find proof, let me know. I’ll be waiting. Religion has had thousands of years to prove its claims, and it still can’t do better than “wait until you die.”


Oh, no. You see, if it was actually in the pursuit of knowledge, it would be provable. With, you know. Evidence. As the majority of the religious people on this board will be happy to inform you, it is a matter of faith, not evidence.

I guess that people hunting the cure for something like prion disease isn't a matter of pursuing knowledge, since they haven't yet discovered evidence for how to cure such a disease. /s

Not all evidence is in-your-face or easy to find. You do know this, right?

See, here’s the key difference. Religion has had as one of its core claims being exempt from the material world, and not having any evidence by design. Diseases don’t work that way. You’re comparing apples and chocolate.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Kowani wrote: I mean, for someone who’s already religious, I would not come down and force them to recant. But to pass it on? Nah.

I could. But am I going to? Nah.

Then you're going on the ignore list. I have better things to do than continue talking to petulant teenagers whose entire political beliefs boil down to angst and grandiose delusions.

Ahh, so your ignore list encompasses half the site. Or is it just people whose beliefs attack your worldview?

Torrocca wrote:

Kubra wrote: Well y'know why not live
we're living anyways

I mean, living for the sake of living's good and all, but that sounds (and feels, at least from personal experience) pretty dull and boring compared to living for a purpose beyond the self, whether that purpose is derived from worldly conditions or from otherworldly faith.

Aw lifes what you make of it
get a job and work it, retreat to a monastery, go off to fight despots in far off lands, do it at home, it's just a matter of finding what jives, y'know? it's something to do.

Why you've spent pages on discussing Kowani's hate boner beats me.

Here's an interesting question. Can communists and ultranationalists work together to overthrow the system or defend a certain order of things? I've been studying the '93 constitutional crisis in Russia, in which Yeltsin was opposed by Soviet-era nomenklatura as well as communist and nationalist groups. Would you work with the far-right?

Nakena wrote:

Kowani wrote:I could. But am I going to? Nah.

NSG does not disppoints me tonight.

I try.

Kowani wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
So then you don't actually want to abolish religion.

To respond the same way I did to UMM: I would not have to police come down to a Christian’s house and force them to recant. That’s impractical. But passing their beliefs on? Nah.

Seemed pretty heavily implied by your earlier claims of wanting to abolish religion, but, as noted above, you've made it clear that that's not what you want to do.

Well, congratulations on missing the point of banning religion.

I don't see how your plans on banning religion are gonna find any effect whatsoever if they basically boil down to, "religion's canceled but you can still be religious lol".

I guess that people hunting the cure for something like prion disease isn't a matter of pursuing knowledge, since they haven't yet discovered evidence for how to cure such a disease. /s

Not all evidence is in-your-face or easy to find. You do know this, right?

See, here’s the key difference. Religion has had as one of its core claims being exempt from the material world, and not having any evidence by design. Diseases don’t work that way. You’re comparing apples and chocolate.

Except that most religions don't see their objects of worship as actually separate from the material world, beyond being divine things.

Religion will naturally collapse soon enough tbh

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:Why you've spent pages on discussing Kowani's hate boner beats me.

Here's an interesting question. Can communists and ultranationalists work together to overthrow the system or defend a certain order of things? I've been studying the '93 constitutional crisis in Russia, in which Yeltsin was opposed by Soviet-era nomenklatura as well as communist and nationalist groups. Would you work with the far-right?

It's hard to talk nomenklatura in reference to Yeltsin
I mean there certainly was a new class there, but damn if they didn't put the other one to shame with their shamelessness
In any case, the answer is a resounding no.

Grand Proudhonia wrote:Religion will naturally collapse soon enough tbh

Eh, doubtful. If it does? Alrighty then, I guess that opens up a path for irreligious Socialism and the like to take hold.

If it doesn't, though? Better to reconcile matters of faith with leftist ideology than to seek its destruction and create unnecessary hostilities in a time when comrades are desperately needed.

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:Why you've spent pages on discussing Kowani's hate boner beats me.

Here's an interesting question. Can communists and ultranationalists work together to overthrow the system or defend a certain order of things? I've been studying the '93 constitutional crisis in Russia, in which Yeltsin was opposed by Soviet-era nomenklatura as well as communist and nationalist groups. Would you work with the far-right?

No, im barely willing to work with the totalitarian left

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:Why you've spent pages on discussing Kowani's hate boner beats me.

Here's an interesting question. Can communists and ultranationalists work together to overthrow the system or defend a certain order of things? I've been studying the '93 constitutional crisis in Russia, in which Yeltsin was opposed by Soviet-era nomenklatura as well as communist and nationalist groups.

I mean, communism is at least, theoretically, supposed to transcend nations. So, while I’m sure it might work out of necessity, it’s not exactly a main feature in the system.

Torrocca wrote:

Kowani wrote: To respond the same way I did to UMM: I would not have to police come down to a Christian’s house and force them to recant. That’s impractical. But passing their beliefs on? Nah.
Well, congratulations on missing the point of banning religion.

I don't see how your plans on banning religion are gonna find any effect whatsoever if they basically boil down to, "religion's canceled but you can still be religious lol".

Okay, let’s give an example. We shall say Bob is a Christian. He has kids. Those kids will be educated in state schools. Bob may attempt to pass down his religion to his children. But if he is discovered doing so, well, that’s a different story.

See, here’s the key difference. Religion has had as one of its core claims being exempt from the material world, and not having any evidence by design. Diseases don’t work that way. You’re comparing apples and chocolate.

Except that most religions don't see their objects of worship as actually separate from the material world, beyond being divine things.

…Most religions don’t see their Gods as physical beings.

Torrocca wrote:

Grand Proudhonia wrote:Religion will naturally collapse soon enough tbh

Eh, doubtful. If it does? Alrighty then, I guess that opens up a path for irreligious Socialism and the like to take hold.

If it doesn't, though? Better to reconcile matters of faith with leftist ideology than to seek its destruction and create unnecessary hostilities in a time when comrades are desperately needed.

Exponential technological growth is right around the corner, god will be rendered obsolete without a doubt.... He just can't compete with us

Kowani wrote:Okay, let’s give an example. We shall say Bob is a Christian. He has kids. Those kids will be educated in state schools. Bob may attempt to pass down his religion to his children. But if he is discovered doing so, well, that’s a different story.

That's basically what the Soviet Union and Albania did, along with other repressive policies. It didn't work.

Jack Thomas Lang wrote:

Kowani wrote:Okay, let’s give an example. We shall say Bob is a Christian. He has kids. Those kids will be educated in state schools. Bob may attempt to pass down his religion to his children. But if he is discovered doing so, well, that’s a different story.

That's basically what the Soviet Union and Albania did, along with other repressive policies. It didn't work.

Because, as I said earlier, they failed to abolish the material circumstances that allow religion to grow. A state following my principles would be concerned first with said conditions, then being what they are) before tackling the other side.

Aight so be straight with me ya'll who can admit to having read Capital
Don't be shy, we support each other when it comes to traumatic experiences

Kowani wrote:Because, as I said earlier, they failed to abolish the material circumstances that allow religion to grow. A state following my principles would be concerned first with said conditions, then being what they are) before tackling the other side.

You can believe whatever you want. Apart from religion, of course.

Grand Proudhonia wrote:Religion will naturally collapse soon enough tbh

Depends on what you mean "collapse". The near-monopoly of Christianity in the West is slowly but steadily collapsing, sure, but religion in general? Much as I'd like to, it's not likely anytime soon.