NATION

PASSWORD

Was Jesus a Communist?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:09 am

You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Probably the reason that it is harder for the rich to get into Heaven than the poor is that the rich are more likely to be poor stewards of the talents that God loans to them on this Earth.


Nah.

16. And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

17. And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

18. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

19. Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

20. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?

21. Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

22. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

23. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

24. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

25. When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?

26. But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

27. Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?

28. And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

29. And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

30. But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.


Giving up everything to follow Jesus gets you the best deal. You get saved AND you get to sit on a throne and judge the tribes. W00t!

But all you really need to do to be saved is follow the Commandments, of which he enumerates six in the lines 18 and 19.

Interestingly, he doesn't tell the rich young man about the worldly reward (sitting on a throne), he only mentions that later to his disciples.

There's nothing there about being stewards of talents, or having responsibilities. Of the six commandments, I don't see that any of them sit more heavily on the rich than on the poor.

However, the "eye of a camel" or whatever it is is mentioned in two other places which I haven't looked at yet.



EDIT: OK, I've looked at Luke 18 now. It's similar, but it doesn't state that the rich man is out of earshot when Jesus mentions the worldly bonus for giving up everything to follow him.



EDIT 2: And Mark 10 is the same, but even more explicit in the promise of WORLDY power for giving up everything to follow him:

29And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,

30But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

Man, that's some fat bribe. You don't want to go offering that to some rich fuck. And as in Matthew, Jesus doesn't. The rich man has left before he says that.

A cynical person might ask what all that stuff matters compared with eternal life in Heaven, but if any of the Disciples brought that up it's not recorded. The next passage is where Jesus tells 'em he will be dead soon, which is a bit like the guy who just took your money saying he needs to step out the back for a moment, before he's handed over the goods.
Last edited by Class Warhair on Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
Dododecapod
Minister
 
Posts: 2965
Founded: Nov 02, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Dododecapod » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:09 am

Bendira wrote:lol at how the commies dont want to be associated with Jesus, even though they have the same message.

Same message? No. The ultimate goal - everyone having all they need, and living in peace and harmony - may be the same, but their methods of getting there differ radically.
GENERATION 28: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

User avatar
You-Gi-Owe
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6230
Founded: Jul 26, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby You-Gi-Owe » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:10 am

Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Pandas and Heineken wrote:After watching some religious crap, it seems that Jesus hated the rich and loved the poor. To me, it seems that Jesus constantly stated that the rich had no power over the poor. Jesus even said himself:
"It's very hard for a rich man to get into Heaven. It's easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle."
This says to me that unless you're poor, you're going to Hell. Thoughts?

NOTE: PLEASE DON'T TURN THIS INTO A RELIGION DISCUSSION!

I doubt that Jesus was communist.

He was also preaching about the KINGDOM Of HEAVEN.
God the Father is the King and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are One with Him.

Probably the reason that it is harder for the rich to get into Heaven than the poor is that the rich are more likely to be poor stewards of the talents that God loans to them on this Earth. The rich have more responsibilities that than poor. Fortunately, Jesus forgives the rich, too.


The kingdom of heaven refers to the model of government - a benevolent dictatorship. It doesn't speak to the economic model.

Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?

I still do not believe that the label of "communist" applies to Jesus.
“Man, I'm so hip I won't even eat a square meal!”
"We've always been at war with Eastasia." 1984, George Orwell
Tyrion: "Those are brave men knocking at our door. Let's go kill them!"
“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” ~ James Madison quotes

User avatar
The Black Forrest
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33554
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Black Forrest » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:10 am

Ifreann wrote:I didn't think hating rich people implied communism. Nor do I think Jesus hated anyone.


Indeed. His words were not about money. It's the persons actions......
*I am a master proofreader after I click Submit.
* There is actually a War on Christmas. But Christmas started it, with it's unparalleled aggression against the Thanksgiving Holiday, and now Christmas has seized much Lebensraum in November, and are pushing into October. The rest of us seek to repel these invaders, and push them back to the status quo ante bellum Black Friday border. -Trotskylvania
* Silence Is Golden But Duct Tape Is Silver.
* I felt like Ayn Rand cornered me at a party, and three minutes in I found my first objection to what she was saying, but she kept talking without interruption for ten more days. - Max Barry talking about Atlas Shrugged

User avatar
Conservative Alliances
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1323
Founded: Jul 27, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Conservative Alliances » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:12 am

You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Pandas and Heineken wrote:After watching some religious crap, it seems that Jesus hated the rich and loved the poor. To me, it seems that Jesus constantly stated that the rich had no power over the poor. Jesus even said himself:
"It's very hard for a rich man to get into Heaven. It's easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle."
This says to me that unless you're poor, you're going to Hell. Thoughts?

NOTE: PLEASE DON'T TURN THIS INTO A RELIGION DISCUSSION!

I doubt that Jesus was communist.

He was also preaching about the KINGDOM Of HEAVEN.
God the Father is the King and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are One with Him.

Probably the reason that it is harder for the rich to get into Heaven than the poor is that the rich are more likely to be poor stewards of the talents that God loans to them on this Earth. The rich have more responsibilities that than poor. Fortunately, Jesus forgives the rich, too.


The kingdom of heaven refers to the model of government - a benevolent dictatorship. It doesn't speak to the economic model.

Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?

I still do not believe that the label of "communist" applies to Jesus.

Depends on the communism...Dictatorship by Proletariat fits your explanation, but so-called "true" communism is stateless.

I agree that communism does not apply to Jesus.
Last edited by Conservative Alliances on Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
I am the Ghost of Sparta
Member of the Ebul NSG Right-Wing Establishment
Economic Left/Right: 9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.92
Spectrum
Foriegn Affairs
Cultural
Political Spectrum Quiz
Essentially a mix of the American Dream and 1950s culture with futuristic technology.
Rhodmhire wrote:I love you.
Liuzzo wrote:Conversely Conservative Alliances, Vetalia, and others make terrific arguments that people may not agree with but you can discuss.
Glorious Homeland wrote:Although some individuals provided counter-points which tended to put to bed a few of my previous statements (conservative alliances, zoingo)

User avatar
The Tofu Islands
Minister
 
Posts: 2872
Founded: Mar 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Tofu Islands » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:27 am

Conservative Alliances wrote:I don't see how that matters in the least bit. The point is that those that work harder and take advantage of what they are given will succeed.

I don't think, however, that it's referring to material goods. And I feel that "succeed" isn't really the right word in the context. "Be blessed" would be better.

None of this implies capitalism nor excludes communism.

You-Gi-Owe wrote:Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?

No, no it isn't.
In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Grave_n_idle » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:27 am

You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Pandas and Heineken wrote:After watching some religious crap, it seems that Jesus hated the rich and loved the poor. To me, it seems that Jesus constantly stated that the rich had no power over the poor. Jesus even said himself:
"It's very hard for a rich man to get into Heaven. It's easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle."
This says to me that unless you're poor, you're going to Hell. Thoughts?

NOTE: PLEASE DON'T TURN THIS INTO A RELIGION DISCUSSION!

I doubt that Jesus was communist.

He was also preaching about the KINGDOM Of HEAVEN.
God the Father is the King and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are One with Him.

Probably the reason that it is harder for the rich to get into Heaven than the poor is that the rich are more likely to be poor stewards of the talents that God loans to them on this Earth. The rich have more responsibilities that than poor. Fortunately, Jesus forgives the rich, too.


The kingdom of heaven refers to the model of government - a benevolent dictatorship. It doesn't speak to the economic model.

Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?


No.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
The blessed Chris
Minister
 
Posts: 2520
Founded: Jul 13, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The blessed Chris » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:28 am

Dododecapod wrote:No. The Jesus of the Bible was an ascetic - one who seeks to live simply, without the distractions of goods and ownership, that he may perfect himself spiritually. When asked how to be a good folower of him, he says to do likewise, to give away your worldly goods and follow the ascetic path.
A good communist wants everyone to have equal access to everything. Jesus wanted to have nothing.


This.

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:31 am

Dododecapod wrote:
Bendira wrote:lol at how the commies dont want to be associated with Jesus, even though they have the same message.

Same message? No. The ultimate goal - everyone having all they need, and living in peace and harmony - may be the same, but their methods of getting there differ radically.


Yeah kinda. "How to get there" isn't plausibly laid out in either case though :p
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:32 am

The blessed Chris wrote:
Dododecapod wrote:No. The Jesus of the Bible was an ascetic - one who seeks to live simply, without the distractions of goods and ownership, that he may perfect himself spiritually. When asked how to be a good folower of him, he says to do likewise, to give away your worldly goods and follow the ascetic path.
A good communist wants everyone to have equal access to everything. Jesus wanted to have nothing.


This.


Someone has already cheered for that, so I'll repeat: being an ascetic does not rule out being a communist.
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:43 am

The Black Forrest wrote:
Ifreann wrote:I didn't think hating rich people implied communism. Nor do I think Jesus hated anyone.


Indeed. His words were not about money. It's the persons actions......


His words were not about money?

"if you want to be perfect, go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor" isn't about money?

It's not just "give some money to the poor" either!

Of course, if everyone did that there would be a contradiction because the last of the poor would have stuff and no-one to sell it to. I'm not quite sure what happens then, maybe people start smashing shit up so no-one has to own it.
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
The Alma Mater
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15921
Founded: May 23, 2004
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Alma Mater » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:46 am

So.. now that we established that Jesus at his birth was reasonably wealthy, both due to the excellent craftsmanship of Josef and the precious gifts handed to him by the wise men..

And now that we established he owned nothing when he started preaching...

What did he do with the money ? It seems relevant to the topic.
Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease.
It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.
- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Grave_n_idle » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:46 am

Class Warhair wrote:
The Black Forrest wrote:
Ifreann wrote:I didn't think hating rich people implied communism. Nor do I think Jesus hated anyone.


Indeed. His words were not about money. It's the persons actions......


His words were not about money?

"if you want to be perfect, go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor" isn't about money?

It's not just "give some money to the poor" either!

Of course, if everyone did that there would be a contradiction because the last of the poor would have stuff and no-one to sell it to. I'm not quite sure what happens then, maybe people start smashing shit up so no-one has to own it.


At some point, there's going to be a balance - everyone has what they need, and people aren't being distracted by excess worldliness. The 'perfect' model of Christianity is minimalist communism.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Grave_n_idle » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:47 am

The Alma Mater wrote:So.. now that we established that Jesus at his birth was reasonably wealthy, both due to the excellent craftsmanship of Josef and the precious gifts handed to him by the wise men..

And now that we established he owned nothing when he started preaching...

What did he do with the money ? It seems relevant to the topic.


If he wasn't hypocritical? He gave it away, or sold it and funded the poor. Probably.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
You-Gi-Owe
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6230
Founded: Jul 26, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby You-Gi-Owe » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:49 am

Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:The kingdom of heaven refers to the model of government - a benevolent dictatorship. It doesn't speak to the economic model.

Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?

No.

Please describe what separates govt and economics in a communist society.
“Man, I'm so hip I won't even eat a square meal!”
"We've always been at war with Eastasia." 1984, George Orwell
Tyrion: "Those are brave men knocking at our door. Let's go kill them!"
“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” ~ James Madison quotes

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Grave_n_idle » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:50 am

You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:The kingdom of heaven refers to the model of government - a benevolent dictatorship. It doesn't speak to the economic model.

Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?

No.

Please describe what separates govt and economics in a communist society.


There is no intrinsic link between government and economics in a communist society.

Your question is meaningless.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
You-Gi-Owe
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6230
Founded: Jul 26, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby You-Gi-Owe » Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:55 am

Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:The kingdom of heaven refers to the model of government - a benevolent dictatorship. It doesn't speak to the economic model.

Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?

No.

Please describe what separates govt and economics in a communist society.

There is no intrinsic link between government and economics in a communist society.

Your question is meaningless.

Doesn't the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (a government term) own the means of production (an economic term)?
“Man, I'm so hip I won't even eat a square meal!”
"We've always been at war with Eastasia." 1984, George Orwell
Tyrion: "Those are brave men knocking at our door. Let's go kill them!"
“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” ~ James Madison quotes

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Democratic Socialists

Postby Grave_n_idle » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:05 pm

You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:The kingdom of heaven refers to the model of government - a benevolent dictatorship. It doesn't speak to the economic model.

Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?

No.

Please describe what separates govt and economics in a communist society.

There is no intrinsic link between government and economics in a communist society.

Your question is meaningless.

Doesn't the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (a government term) own the means of production (an economic term)?


Intrinsically? No.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:12 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Class Warhair wrote:
The Black Forrest wrote:
Ifreann wrote:I didn't think hating rich people implied communism. Nor do I think Jesus hated anyone.


Indeed. His words were not about money. It's the persons actions......


His words were not about money?

"if you want to be perfect, go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor" isn't about money?

It's not just "give some money to the poor" either!

Of course, if everyone did that there would be a contradiction because the last of the poor would have stuff and no-one to sell it to. I'm not quite sure what happens then, maybe people start smashing shit up so no-one has to own it.


At some point, there's going to be a balance - everyone has what they need, and people aren't being distracted by excess worldliness. The 'perfect' model of Christianity is minimalist communism.


You can probably guess, I'm not a Christian so I don't take the Bible too seriously. But in fairness, this one story of a rich man isn't the whole of the Christian prescription. And there's a fairly serious contradiction even within this short passage (all 3 versions): the return "a hundred times" in this life, of what the Disciples have given up to follow Jesus.

And let's call it ascetic socialism. Is it really "communism" without the idea of critical property being held in common? All having equally as much private property isn't quite the same thing.
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
Panzerjaeger
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9856
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Panzerjaeger » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:19 pm

You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
You-Gi-Owe wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:The kingdom of heaven refers to the model of government - a benevolent dictatorship. It doesn't speak to the economic model.

Isn't Communism a totalitarian fusion of government and economics?

No.

Please describe what separates govt and economics in a communist society.

There is no intrinsic link between government and economics in a communist society.

Your question is meaningless.

Doesn't the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (a government term) own the means of production (an economic term)?

Dictatorship of the Proletariat is an idea created by Lenin not Marx so no it isn't a communist thing it is a branch of Communism though.
Friendly Neighborhood Fascist™
ФАШИЗМ БЕЗГРАНИЧНЫЙ И КРАСНЫЙ
Caninope wrote:Toyota: Keep moving forward, even when you don't want to!

Christmahanikwanzikah wrote:Timothy McVeigh casts... Pyrotechnics!

Greater Americania wrote:lol "No Comrade Ivan! Don't stick your head in there! That's the wood chi...!"

New Kereptica wrote:Fascism: because people are too smart nowadays.

User avatar
Risottia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 51079
Founded: Sep 05, 2006
New York Times Democracy

Postby Risottia » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:23 pm

Panzerjaeger wrote:Dictatorship of the Proletariat is an idea created by Lenin not Marx so no it isn't a communist thing it is a branch of Communism though.


To be even more accurate, Dictatorship of the Proletariat was thought to be a transitional phase that allowed society to transform from a "dictatorship of the non-working classes" into a classless society (communism).
Theorically, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a tyranny of the majority (that is, the working class led by the Communist Party), but not a democracy - because minority groups (like the bourgoisie) don't get a say.
Last edited by Risottia on Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Statanist through and through.
Evilutionist Atheist Crusadjihadist. "Darwinu Akhbar! Dawkins vult!"
Founder of the NSG Peace Prize Committee.
I'm back.

User avatar
Panzerjaeger
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9856
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Panzerjaeger » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:27 pm

Risottia wrote:
Panzerjaeger wrote:Dictatorship of the Proletariat is an idea created by Lenin not Marx so no it isn't a communist thing it is a branch of Communism though.


To be even more accurate, Dictatorship of the Proletariat was thought to be a transitional phase that allowed society to transform from a "dictatorship of the non-working classes" into a classless society (communism).
Theorically, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a tyranny of the majority (that is, the working class led by the Communist Party), but not a democracy - because minority groups (like the bourgoisie) don't get a say.

True I shouldn't have been so vague. Needless to say Lenin believed a transitory phase was necessary especially for a nation like Russia that was still agrarian.
Friendly Neighborhood Fascist™
ФАШИЗМ БЕЗГРАНИЧНЫЙ И КРАСНЫЙ
Caninope wrote:Toyota: Keep moving forward, even when you don't want to!

Christmahanikwanzikah wrote:Timothy McVeigh casts... Pyrotechnics!

Greater Americania wrote:lol "No Comrade Ivan! Don't stick your head in there! That's the wood chi...!"

New Kereptica wrote:Fascism: because people are too smart nowadays.

User avatar
Risottia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 51079
Founded: Sep 05, 2006
New York Times Democracy

Postby Risottia » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:29 pm

Panzerjaeger wrote:
Risottia wrote:
Panzerjaeger wrote:Dictatorship of the Proletariat is an idea created by Lenin not Marx so no it isn't a communist thing it is a branch of Communism though.


To be even more accurate, Dictatorship of the Proletariat was thought to be a transitional phase that allowed society to transform from a "dictatorship of the non-working classes" into a classless society (communism).
Theorically, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a tyranny of the majority (that is, the working class led by the Communist Party), but not a democracy - because minority groups (like the bourgoisie) don't get a say.

True I shouldn't have been so vague. Needless to say Lenin believed a transitory phase was necessary especially for a nation like Russia that was still agrarian.

Yep. Ironically enough, the first country where Das Kapital was allowed to be translated and sold to the public by the local authorities was Tsarist Russia... because the police thought that, as Marx described an highly industrialized society - and the Russian society wasn't - his subversive ideas would have never found fertile ground there. :lol:
Statanist through and through.
Evilutionist Atheist Crusadjihadist. "Darwinu Akhbar! Dawkins vult!"
Founder of the NSG Peace Prize Committee.
I'm back.

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:28 pm

Panzerjaeger wrote:Dictatorship of the Proletariat is an idea created by Lenin not Marx so no it isn't a communist thing it is a branch of Communism though.


Hence why I say that "how to get there" is the shonkiest thing about Communism. Let's try Dictatorship of ... no, stop right there. Dictatorship? And it only gets worse if you have to maintain it for years until the agrarian society has developed a damn proletariat!

Things just haven't gone as Marx predicted. Marx would totally spew if he could see the modern working class whose net worth in a lot of cases is zero or negative (debt exceeding assets) with their money tied up in retirement plans ... invested in shares ... in ownership of the damn means of production! He'd tear his beard out!




Risottia wrote:
Panzerjaeger wrote:
Risottia wrote:
Panzerjaeger wrote:Dictatorship of the Proletariat is an idea created by Lenin not Marx so no it isn't a communist thing it is a branch of Communism though.


To be even more accurate, Dictatorship of the Proletariat was thought to be a transitional phase that allowed society to transform from a "dictatorship of the non-working classes" into a classless society (communism).
Theorically, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a tyranny of the majority (that is, the working class led by the Communist Party), but not a democracy - because minority groups (like the bourgoisie) don't get a say.

True I shouldn't have been so vague. Needless to say Lenin believed a transitory phase was necessary especially for a nation like Russia that was still agrarian.

Yep. Ironically enough, the first country where Das Kapital was allowed to be translated and sold to the public by the local authorities was Tsarist Russia... because the police thought that, as Marx described an highly industrialized society - and the Russian society wasn't - his subversive ideas would have never found fertile ground there. :lol:


I didn't know that. Won't forget it either :lol:
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
Bamabam
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 122
Founded: Dec 25, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Bamabam » Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:36 pm

The Tofu Islands wrote:
Bamabam wrote:I see what you are saying with Acts 4:32-35.But that is out of personal choice not a forced government law.

Which doesn't make it not communist. As I mentioned in the first paragraph of the post you were supposedly replying to.

Bamabam wrote:And by conservative i meant compared to how we today call a "conservative" which is why i think many of todays conservatives are religious or at least claim to be christians.

I doubt he'd agree with, for example, pro-gun and anti-tax positions that most USian conservatives seem to hold.

well...he did tell us to turn the other cheek so he could be against people using it in a self-defense situation .But there is nothing wrong with having a gun.The gun doesnt kill people, people kill people.And God obviously wants some kind of tax.As he set up a tiche.But you have to be reasonable and see that high taxes do little good economically and socially.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bombadil, Dazchan, Freezic Vast, Gallade, Google Adsense [Bot], Internationalist Bastard, Jolthig, San Lumen, The Grims

Advertisement

Remove ads