ilmdge posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

MarxUltor posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

Petrol posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:
check how i address the Left

No. Real talk, my advice is do not address The Left. it doesn't exist the way you think it does, and you really don't know enough to be doling out advice in the first place.

instead, if you genuinely want to learn, Lurk More. ask questions if you need to, but mostly lurk silently. you might also want to try joining an org if you havent already, but try to keep your mouth shut there most of the time too, and just follow the lead of others and try not to fuck anything up, until such time as you are no longer a noob. ganbatte, flanders-kun.

That's fair but I feel I renounced liberalism around 2010 and I've been reading leftist/Marxist/communist stuff since then and I've helped out at the workers defense fund and local socialist organizaxxtion where I used to live. Idk how much anything counts for anything though, to me I think it's just about having your heart in the right place and basic theoretical foundation

That's fair but I feel like somehow in spite of these alleged facts, you just waddled up in here and seriously used the phrase "totalitarian communism" and urinated upon the faces of every single person in human history who wrote, fought for, and died for that "leftist/Marxist/communist stuff" in your fox news op-ed.

But lets run with your theory that communism needs christian ethics. That's what you want to lead with, so develop it, flesh it out a bit. You have a great concept or something, I guess, but it just seems like maybe you went a little thin on some of the practical details which will help it work in observable reality.

Many catastrophic communists misguidedly see their brutal ideology of failure as a means of elevating the poor and working class of the world out of crushing poverty which has somehow sprung up organically and inexplicably in the third world, like an unexpected prank from an omnipotent, omniscient omniphiliac who's just had an off day for approximately 50% of his best guess of the entire lifespan of creation. Please provide some real-world practical applications for the use of Christian Ethics by those Communists desiring to elevate the working class of, for example, Africa and/or South America from the hopeless depths of poverty and oppression.

Because you're obviously well versed in the subject, and you've clearly put a lot of thought into this, I would like you to focus specifically only on those christian ethics which have not yet been APPLIED repeatedly to the bodies and cultures of the civilizations which existed on those continents for millennia before being introduced to totalitarian communism by the Spanish collectivistatadors and other waves of bolshevik thugs and their so-called "Working Man's Burden" to bring the light of civilization and the 20th century experimental communist principle of chattel slavery to the darker continents over the past thousand years or two.

you're misreading my point. i'm not suggesting that some parts of the world have never practiced christian ethics or whatever. i'm saying that specifically for communism to be spread in the hostile environment of capitalist hegemony, an approach similar to evangelical christianity could be employed to win over your friends and co workers instead of just being that weird disheveled loner who always smells like wine and reads weird books

what does this even mean though, "approach similar to evangelical christianity"? become marxist televangelists or what

On the contrary, I'm saying accept Marxist theory and practice the ethical teachings of Jesus Christ and his apostles

glomper_stomper posted:

too bad about all the pogroms though

i'm sorry i didn't hear what you said, could you repeat?

elemennop posted:

communist catholic countries - chile for a blink, romania, poland
communist eastern orthodox countries - too long to list

orthodoxy > catholicism once again

delet

MarxUltor posted:

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

many people were confused about what I meant specifically by Christian Ethics, and seemed to be conflating Christian ethics with the behaviors of many church goers

Ahh yes, silly us.

Condemning every single actually existing church and discounting two millennium of Christian tradition and practice then pointing at a huge pile of the most generic Bible stuff ever

So tell me again your thoughts on the USSR under Stalin?

as evidence that you've figured out the real way how to do jesusing right all by yourself is like entry-level cult leader stuff.

Ayyyye bro I'm not suggesting I'm doing anything special or that I'm special in any way. I'm simply saying that if you want to practice Christianity, one should go to the teachings of Christ and biblical scriptures, sort of how if one wants to call themselves a Marxist or practice Marxist critiques of capitalism, one is better off reading Das Kapital than simply following every Reddit Marxist.

I don't think I'm suggesting anything radical here other than simple orthodoxy.

I guess Chesterton was right.....

Im genuinely concerned that what's really going on is we may be getting a glimpse of the next contestant on who wants to be a victim of America's mental health care system.

Regrettably, out of concern for your wellbeing, and social responsibility, I must therefore withdraw my suggestion that you consume LSD, until after you hit at least 30 years old and lose the messianic complex, as an apparent risk factor for triggering 'latent' psychosis. It's still pretty good advice for anyone else though.

Oh thanks for the advice I'll pass it on to myself 10 years ago,

..
...

oh shhhht it worked

The_Boourns_Identity posted:

goodposthaver posted:
yeah uh.... im not sure how creating a type of catholic/christian leftism would work out (though i really do think people should try) im not sure how reducing marxism to a set of abstract moral (biblical) principles is helpful. at all. no offense.


Oh wow interesting take except I never suggested reducing Marxism to anything other than Marxism I'm simply talking about Marxists- those who subscribe to the critical theories of Marx with regard to capitalism, should conduct themselves according to the ethics taught by the Lord Jesus Christ

owned again......

but yeah, that is a non-controversial statement. marxists have conducted themselves in many different ways throughout history. what im worried about is this ~Zizekian~ attempt to "marxify" theology or to translate religion into marxian terms, instead of trying to find points of contact between the two. but you seem pretty upset bro. so whatever

getfiscal posted:

One problem I noticed in this thread is that everyone is treating religion as a set of variable opinions which you get to play around with to score political points and make it so that like Colorado has public dental care or whatever. In reality, God is real and religion is true and that's not really the same as what some GBS conservatives think about tax rates in Wyoming or whatever.

good point

roseweird posted:

EmanuelaBrolandi posted:

The real reason the OP is garbage doesn't have to do with all the dumb stuff about Marxism it's because all the talk of christianity is completely lacking in depth. Its one thing for all the atheist internet white dudes on here to have a philistine understanding of Christianity but if you're gonna make a thread about it you need to address issues in Christianity more than 'Totalitarian Marxism'

The 'teachings of the Lord Christ' have nothing to do with the Bible as we or Evangelical Christians know it. Drawing out the actual radical strain behind Christianity as the revolutionary movement it once was involves an intense amount of didactive work pretty much to the point where you have to throw out all of the reactionary ideas of Paul and more. The problem: Paul is the reason Christianity became a religion of gentiles and not a Jewish movement, so it's extremely hard to not include his influence.

it's hard to like much about paul's letters after reading through the gospels and acts, and easy to blame him for the failures of growing christian organization through history. (you don't have to blame anyone in particular, but if you really want to then you'd prob be better off blaming constantine and his creepy mom, imo).

similarly if you go looking for something 'revolutionary' in christianity it is easy to locate it in the brief career of jesus himself, because he was both absolutely uncompromising and highly inscrutable. these qualities make him simultaneously inspiring and a suitable background for projection. but jesus did not teach revolution, but a mystery, in a spirit of humility. if you don't like the cliche of 'mystery', because you want to be able to connect religion to something more concrete in your individual intellect, then you have not observed humility.

paul was faced with the basic contradiction of a religion of forgiveness for sinners which yet had to maintain its evangelistic potential. he was a sinner and preached from his own sin. the truth of paul is in his weakness and the reproof of his failings.

if there is one thing that communists can learn from the bible, it is christ's absolutely uncompromising rejection of selfishness, which in selfishness can be easily confused for the absolute rejection of worldly concerns, but actually consists in a material concern purely focused on others, and a faith in the really true goodness of this concern--a faith that the will of god as a human being can perceive it is to care for the weak and poor without expectation of material reward.

but christianity is a religion for sinners, and the religion exists only because of the magnitude of the struggle to overcome our spiritual weakness and learn this lesson. only the truth itself is pure.

Jesus didn't preach revolutionary teachings, Jesus WAS revolutionary in his actions, his actions were the true revolution.

also, from Chesterton :

the spirit of his work "Orthodoxy" is the paradoxical conclusion that the true way to be a revolutionary is through radical orthodoxy.

Lastly, this truth is yet again true in the case of the common modern attempts to diminish or to explain away the divinity of Christ. The thing may be true or not; that I shall deal with before I end. But if the divinity is true it is certainly terribly revolutionary.

That a good man may have his back to the wall is no more than we knew already; but that God could have his back to the wall is a boast for all insurgents for ever. Christianity is the only religion on earth that has felt that omnipotence made God incomplete. Christianity alone has felt that God, to be wholly God, must have been a rebel as well as a king. Alone of all creeds, Christianity has added courage to the virtues of the Creator.

For the only courage worth calling courage must necessarily mean that the soul passes a breaking point--and does not break. In this indeed I approach a matter more dark and awful than it is easy to discuss; and I apologise in advance if any of my phrases fall wrong or seem irreverent touching a matter which the greatest saints and thinkers have justly feared to approach.

But in that terrific tale of the Passion there is a distinct emotional suggestion that the author of all things (in some unthinkable way) went not only through agony, but through doubt.

It is written, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." No; but the Lord thy God may tempt Himself; and it seems as if this was what happened in Gethsemane. In a garden Satan tempted man: and in a garden God tempted God. He passed in some superhuman manner through our human horror of pessimism.

When the world shook and the sun was wiped out of heaven, it was not at the crucifixion, but at the cry from the cross: the cry which confessed that God was forsaken of God.

And now let the revolutionists choose a creed from all the creeds and a god from all the gods of the world, carefully weighing all the gods of inevitable recurrence and of unalterable power. They will not find another god who has himself been in revolt. Nay, (the matter grows too difficult for human speech,) but let the atheists themselves choose a god. They will find only one divinity who ever uttered their isolation; only one religion in which God seemed for an instant to be an atheist.

Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith) (1994-05-01). Orthodoxy

roseweird posted:

u sure do like chesterton a lot

welp, I am just a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ, so needless to say, my cup is overfilling with the love and joy of the Holy Spirit!