Left-Wing Discussion Thread III

[Democratic Communist Federation]

The Amish are the only successful stateless group in the modern age.

I have nothing against the Amish, though I am not a fan of their theology.

Except it's not.

Syria? Libya? Yemen? No, I stand by what I said.

[Genivaria]

The Amish are the only successful stateless group in the modern age.

I have nothing against the Amish, though I am not a fan of their theology.

Except it's not.

Syria? Libya? Yemen? No, I stand by what I said.

Yeah we're not in any of those countries.

[The Multiversal Communist Collective]

Yeah we're not in any of those countries.

Who is we? NationStates is an international forum. How do you know that no one from those countries are in this forum?

Aside from that, is it your position that you only care about human right abuses in your country, not in others?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Perhaps not Christian morality, but rather late-medieval Catholic philosophy.

How so?

If it were based on Christian morality, then there would be more forbidden and taboo stuff, as well as most likely monarchy and lack of support for things like revolution; however we don't see that, instead, we see humanism, which does indeed come out of Christian philosophy, but it doesn't come from Christian moral philosophy.

[Bakery Hill]

How so?

If it were based on Christian morality, then there would be more forbidden and taboo stuff, as well as most likely monarchy and lack of support for things like revolution; however we don't see that, instead, we see humanism, which does indeed come out of Christian philosophy, but it doesn't come from Christian moral philosophy.

All those things seem more in line with Abrahamic/Jewish law. If anything liberalism embraces Jesus's message of equality before God and the right to use free will to the exclusion of all that.

[Genivaria]

Yeah we're not in any of those countries.

Who is we? NationStates is an international forum. How do you know that no one from those countries are in this forum?

Aside from that, is it your position that you only care about human right abuses in your country, not in others?

The United States, don't be coy.

How do you know that no one from those countries are in this forum?

The fuck are you talking about?

[United Muscovite Nations]

If it were based on Christian morality, then there would be more forbidden and taboo stuff, as well as most likely monarchy and lack of support for things like revolution; however we don't see that, instead, we see humanism, which does indeed come out of Christian philosophy, but it doesn't come from Christian moral philosophy.

All those things seem more in line with Abrahamic/Jewish law. If anything liberalism embraces Jesus's message of equality before God and the right to use free will to the exclusion of all that.

Christian philosophy was generally pro-monarchy, and the Bible even makes it clear that the Roman monarchy was established by God to rule over the Earth. It also establishes the authority of bishops, etc.

[Genivaria]

All those things seem more in line with Abrahamic/Jewish law. If anything liberalism embraces Jesus's message of equality before God and the right to use free will to the exclusion of all that.

Christian philosophy was generally pro-monarchy, and the Bible even makes it clear that the Roman monarchy was established by God to rule over the Earth. It also establishes the authority of bishops, etc.

It is curious that Jesus specifically used 'render unto Caesar' as opposed to some more generic royal title or one native to the region, isn't it?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Christian philosophy was generally pro-monarchy, and the Bible even makes it clear that the Roman monarchy was established by God to rule over the Earth. It also establishes the authority of bishops, etc.

It is curious that Jesus specifically used 'render unto Caesar' as opposed to some more generic royal title or one native to the region, isn't it?

Well, in that specific turn of phrase, he was referring to that the money was literally Caesar's because the money actually had his face on it.

[Bakery Hill]

All those things seem more in line with Abrahamic/Jewish law. If anything liberalism embraces Jesus's message of equality before God and the right to use free will to the exclusion of all that.

Christian philosophy was generally pro-monarchy, and the Bible even makes it clear that the Roman monarchy was established by God to rule over the Earth. It also establishes the authority of bishops, etc.

Are you talking about the Render unto Caesar verse? Or another?

[The Sauganash Union]

All those things seem more in line with Abrahamic/Jewish law. If anything liberalism embraces Jesus's message of equality before God and the right to use free will to the exclusion of all that.

Christian philosophy was generally pro-monarchy, and the Bible even makes it clear that the Roman monarchy was established by God to rule over the Earth. It also establishes the authority of bishops, etc.

Romanism is pure lunacy.

[Aillyria]

If it were based on Christian morality, then there would be more forbidden and taboo stuff, as well as most likely monarchy and lack of support for things like revolution; however we don't see that, instead, we see humanism, which does indeed come out of Christian philosophy, but it doesn't come from Christian moral philosophy.

All those things seem more in line with Abrahamic/Jewish law. If anything liberalism embraces Jesus's message of equality before God and the right to use free will to the exclusion of all that.

I don't see how modern liberalism is in line with Abrahamic law.....

All those things seem more in line with Abrahamic/Jewish law. If anything liberalism embraces Jesus's message of equality before God and the right to use free will to the exclusion of all that.

Christian philosophy was generally pro-monarchy, and the Bible even makes it clear that the Roman monarchy was established by God to rule over the Earth. It also establishes the authority of bishops, etc.

WTF? Verse now, or I call bs. I don't recall reading Isa (pbuh) saying anything of the sort in the Bible.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Christian philosophy was generally pro-monarchy, and the Bible even makes it clear that the Roman monarchy was established by God to rule over the Earth. It also establishes the authority of bishops, etc.

Are you talking about the Render unto Caesar verse? Or another?

Romans 13 New International Version (NIV)
Submission to Governing Authorities
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

"Lack of morals is worse."

Talk to me about lack of morals when yours aren't trash. If the lack of morals is not causing people to kill each other en masse, it's better than religious tyranny.

"Depends on what 'liberty' is considered as,"

The ability to do what you want with yourself and your property without being restricted by others and without restricting others.

How are my morals "trash". Abrahamic morality is the foundation of western civilization, not satanic materialism and hedonism.

"Liberty" of that sort is not completely advisable or even possible in a society. Restriction and coersion are integral to keep a nation together, what you speak of is some kind of ancap nonsense.

Because they're based on the hypocritical, authoritarian, unproven, inconsistent, thought-controlling, misanthropic dogma. (at least in the old testament. Jesus has a few good ideas, to be fair. I haven't read the Quran but from what I've heard it seems to air more on the side of the old testament.) The fact that you think the only alternative to it is satanist hedonism is telling.

True, it's not entirely possible, but it's an ideal state to strive towards as much as possible, not to strive against, as legislative morality would. It's not ancap nonsense to try to have individual freedom.

[The Liberated Territories]

My own morality is based around achieving liberty. Anything less is evil.

I read the bible and could find nothing good in there. "God" would make us slaves to each other bound in fanciful spooks such as "duty."

[United Muscovite Nations]

How are my morals "trash". Abrahamic morality is the foundation of western civilization, not satanic materialism and hedonism.

"Liberty" of that sort is not completely advisable or even possible in a society. Restriction and coersion are integral to keep a nation together, what you speak of is some kind of ancap nonsense.

Because they're based on the hypocritical, authoritarian, unproven, inconsistent, thought-controlling, misanthropic dogma. (at least in the old testament. Jesus has a few good ideas, to be fair. I haven't read the Quran but from what I've heard it seems to air more on the side of the old testament.) The fact that you think the only alternative to it is satanist hedonism is telling.

True, it's not entirely possible, but it's an ideal state to strive towards as much as possible, not to strive against, as legislative morality would. It's not ancap nonsense to try to have individual freedom.

Why is liberty desirable?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

You're gonna have to show what you're talking about.

The entire modern civilization created is based on extreme resource use and isn't at all sustainable in the long-term, and, as a result, will crash, and hard too.

What do you suggest to fix this?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

This is the part where you provide some examples.

nearly every instance of conscription, even the instances I like

And conscription is wrong, so rejecting it is fine.

[United Muscovite Nations]

The entire modern civilization created is based on extreme resource use and isn't at all sustainable in the long-term, and, as a result, will crash, and hard too.

What do you suggest to fix this?

Reverting back to more traditional ways of life.

[Bakery Hill]

Are you talking about the Render unto Caesar verse? Or another?

Romans 13 New International Version (NIV)
Submission to Governing Authorities
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

That's Paul for you. That's sort of what I'm talking about.

[Bakery Hill]

Because they're based on the hypocritical, authoritarian, unproven, inconsistent, thought-controlling, misanthropic dogma. (at least in the old testament. Jesus has a few good ideas, to be fair. I haven't read the Quran but from what I've heard it seems to air more on the side of the old testament.) The fact that you think the only alternative to it is satanist hedonism is telling.

True, it's not entirely possible, but it's an ideal state to strive towards as much as possible, not to strive against, as legislative morality would. It's not ancap nonsense to try to have individual freedom.

Why is liberty desirable?

Control over your own life affords you the opportunity to pursue Good. Hence God giving man free will etc.

[Aillyria]

Are you talking about the Render unto Caesar verse? Or another?

Romans 13 New International Version (NIV)
Submission to Governing Authorities
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

That makes no sense, how can a kafir be a servant of our God (swt)?

How are my morals "trash". Abrahamic morality is the foundation of western civilization, not satanic materialism and hedonism.

"Liberty" of that sort is not completely advisable or even possible in a society. Restriction and coersion are integral to keep a nation together, what you speak of is some kind of ancap nonsense.

Because they're based on the hypocritical, authoritarian, unproven, inconsistent, thought-controlling, misanthropic dogma. (at least in the old testament. Jesus has a few good ideas, to be fair. I haven't read the Quran but from what I've heard it seems to air more on the side of the old testament.) The fact that you think the only alternative to it is satanist hedonism is telling.

True, it's not entirely possible, but it's an ideal state to strive towards as much as possible, not to strive against, as legislative morality would. It's not ancap nonsense to try to have individual freedom.

Abrahamic law the basis of righteousness, atheism and it's associated ideas are demonic in nature, and have led humanity astray towards perversion.

There must be a moral standard in civilization or it will lend itself to Satan.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why is liberty desirable?

Control over your own life affords you the opportunity to pursue Good. Hence God giving man free will etc.

It also gives us the opportunity to pursue evil. We have free will, but that doesn't mean we should be unrestrained or unpunished for our wrongdoing.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Because they're based on the hypocritical, authoritarian, unproven, inconsistent, thought-controlling, misanthropic dogma. (at least in the old testament. Jesus has a few good ideas, to be fair. I haven't read the Quran but from what I've heard it seems to air more on the side of the old testament.) The fact that you think the only alternative to it is satanist hedonism is telling.

True, it's not entirely possible, but it's an ideal state to strive towards as much as possible, not to strive against, as legislative morality would. It's not ancap nonsense to try to have individual freedom.

Why is liberty desirable?

Because, ultimately, no one can live your life better than you. To restrict liberty is to assume you know what everyone should do with *whatever you restrict* 100% of the time. Therefore, restricting liberty is believing that you know more about a person's life than they do.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why is liberty desirable?

Because, ultimately, no one can live your life better than you. To restrict liberty is to assume you know what everyone should do with *whatever you restrict* 100% of the time. Therefore, restricting liberty is believing that you know more about a person's life than they do.

It sounds likely that there are people who know more about a person's life than they do.